list_lan_nics

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

Without annotations, the description must cover behavior. It lacks details on pagination, ordering, error handling (e.g., non-existent LAN), and impact of 'depth' and 'filters' parameters. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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, concise sentence that gets to the point. It is front-loaded, but could benefit from additional context while remaining concise. No wasted words.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters, nested objects (depth), and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It misses important context like pagination, response format, and handling of optional parameters. Incomplete for complex usage.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the schema itself explains the parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying the LAN ID is central. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action (list), resource (NICs), and constraint (attached to a specific LAN). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_nics' and 'get_nic'.

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 implies when to use (need NICs on a LAN) but does not provide explicit guidance on prerequisites, alternatives, or when not to use. No mention of required IDs or comparison with sibling tools.

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