faz_list_adoms

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive hints, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'optionally returning only selected fields' behavior, but that is largely redundant with the schema. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, filtering scope) are disclosed, so it meets the minimum bar but does not exceed it.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no fluff or repetition.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described. The tool has only one optional parameter and is a simple list operation. The description is sufficient for this simplicity, though it omits any mention of pagination or result limits, but these are not critical given the output schema.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for documenting the 'fields' parameter. It does clarify that the parameter controls which fields are returned, but it does not list valid field names or explain the format. This is marginal compensation for the single optional parameter.

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 'List' and the resource 'administrative domains', which distinguishes it from singular tools like faz_get_adom and other list tools (devices, alerts, etc.). The optional fields clause adds specificity without confusion.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that faz_get_adom retrieves a single ADOM, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. The context is implied only by the name and description.

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