list_subnets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add valuable context that the default return is a trimmed summary and that raw=true returns full OCI SDK objects. However, it does not mention other behavioral aspects such as pagination, permissions, or error handling, leaving some ambiguity.

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 brief and to the point. Two sentences convey the action, optional filter, and output behavior without unnecessary filler.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should clarify what a 'trimmed summary' contains. It also does not mention pagination or limits, leaving some uncertainty about the return format. While the tool is relatively simple, the vague 'trimmed summary' term is a notable gap.

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 input schema already provides 100% parameter descriptions, so the baseline is met. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it only references raw and VCN filtering, which are already in the schema.

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 the verb ('Lists'), resource ('subnets'), and scope ('in a compartment, optionally filtered by VCN'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_vcns or list_instances by specifying exactly what is listed and that the output is a trimmed summary by default.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool (to list subnets) and how to narrow the scope (by compartment or VCN). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternative tools, but the purpose is specific enough that this is not a major gap.

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