list_vnics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists VNICs with filtering by instance, and returns specific details (IP addresses, subnet info, security groups), which adds useful behavioral context. However, it lacks information on permissions, rate limits, pagination, or error handling, which are important for a list operation.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized. It starts with a clear purpose statement, followed by concise sections for arguments and returns. Each sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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 moderate complexity (list operation with filtering), no annotations, no output schema, and 2 parameters, the description is fairly complete. It covers the purpose, parameters, and return format. However, it could improve by addressing behavioral aspects like pagination or error scenarios, which are common in list tools.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains that 'compartment_id' is for listing VNICs from a compartment and 'instance_id' is an optional filter for VNICs by instance. This clarifies the purpose and usage of both parameters, fully compensating for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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's purpose: 'List all Virtual Network Interface Cards (VNICs) in a compartment.' It specifies the verb ('List') and resource ('VNICs'), and includes scope ('in a compartment'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_vnic' or other list tools, which slightly reduces clarity.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention sibling tools like 'get_vnic' (for retrieving a single VNIC) or other list tools, nor does it specify prerequisites or contexts for usage. This leaves the agent without explicit usage instructions.

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