VPS_getFirewallListV1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It implies a read operation ('retrieve', 'view') but does not disclose pagination, authorization needs, or behavior when no firewalls exist. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 two short sentences with no unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool's simplicity, the description is largely complete: it explains what the tool does and how to use it. However, it could mention pagination details or the distinction from VPS_getFirewallDetailsV1 to be fully comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100% with the 'page' parameter already described as 'Page number'. The description adds no additional meaning, such as default page size or pagination behavior, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 tool retrieves all firewalls, using the verb 'retrieve' and resource 'firewalls'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tool VPS_getFirewallDetailsV1.

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 says 'Use this endpoint to view existing firewall configurations', providing a when-to-use scenario. However, it lacks guidance on when not to use it or mention of alternatives like VPS_getFirewallDetailsV1.

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