list_integration_wans

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided. The description only says 'Returns: Paginated list of WAN connections' but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, error behavior, or consequences of invalid parameters.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is structured as a docstring with Args/Returns sections, but includes an extraneous 'settings' parameter. It is moderately concise but could be tighter.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the output schema exists, the description covers basic parameters and return type. However, it lacks pagination behavior details, error handling, and usage context. It is adequate but not complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description provides constraints for 'limit' (1-1000) and explains 'site_id' and 'offset', which adds value over the schema (which has 0% description coverage). However, it mentions an extra 'settings' parameter not present in the input schema, causing inconsistency.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'List WAN connections' which is a specific verb and resource. It also mentions pagination via limit/offset, but does not differentiate from siblings like list_integration_networks or list_integration_devices.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No prerequisites, context, or exclusions mentioned. The description only explains parameters.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.