list_address_objects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The words 'List' and 'retrieves' signal a read-only operation, and the Returns section adds useful output context, but the description does not state permissions, pagination behavior, or whether vdom scoping changes the result set.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and is reasonably sized. The Parameters section partly repeats schema information, but the Returns section earns its place because there is no output schema.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, vdom default behavior, and expected return fields. It is largely complete, though it could mention permissions or pagination if those are relevant.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that vdom is optional and uses the device default, while device_id is the FortiGate identifier. This is useful clarification beyond the schema's terse 'Virtual Domain' description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: listing all address objects configured on a FortiGate device. The mention of IP addresses, subnets, ranges, and FQDN objects clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like list_address_groups or list_service_objects.

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 makes the intended use clear by implication: retrieve all address objects on a device. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this versus alternatives such as get_address_group_detail or list_address_groups, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites.

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