list_loadbalancer_nics

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint: true, so the agent already knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the scope of NICs associated with a load balancer but does not disclose behaviors like pagination, filtering defaults, or what happens when no NICs are found. With annotations covering safety, the additional behavioral context is limited.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 list operation with a read-only annotation and full parameter descriptions, the description is fairly complete. It could mention return format or pagination, but such details are less critical for a simple list tool. Overall, the context is sufficient for correct use.

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 100%, documenting all four parameters (depth, filters, datacenter_id, loadbalancer_id) with their own descriptions. The tool description itself does not add any parameter-level guidance, so it does not exceed the baseline provided by 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 'List all NICs balanced by a specific load balancer' clearly states a specific verb and resource, and the phrase 'balanced by a specific load balancer' provides scope that distinguishes it from generic list_nics or list_lan_nics. It does not explicitly name sibling tools, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Usage context is implied by the scope phrase, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_nics or list_lan_nics, nor does it mention exclusions. This is a clear but minimal level of guidance.

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