list_syslog_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the entire behavioral burden for a device-touching call. 'Show' implies a read, but the description does not state read-only guarantees, permission requirements, error behavior, or what the settings payload contains.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource named first and the config path as supporting detail; nothing is padded. The parenthetical is terse but useful for disambiguation.

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?

The tool is simple (2 params, no nested objects, no output schema) and the schema covers both parameters, but with no annotations the description should at least say whether results are global or per-vdom and confirm read-only behavior. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 device_id and vdom are already documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning about vdom scoping or the device_id format, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('primary syslog server settings') and includes the underlying config path (log.syslogd/setting), which makes the target object unambiguous. It does not, however, contrast itself with the closely related sibling get_log_settings.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus get_log_settings or the generic cmdb_get/log_get tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given. Usage has to be inferred from the name alone.

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