list_vip_groups

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but 'List' at least implies a read-only operation. It discloses one useful behavioral fact — that member VIPs are returned alongside each group — but says nothing about pagination, VDOM scoping behavior, or output volume across a device.

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?

One short sentence with no waste, front-loading the verb and resource. Nothing redundant or padded.

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 fully described schema and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It hints at return contents but leaves the agent without any sense of result shape, VDOM behavior, or scope of a call.

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 both device_id and vdom are already documented in the schema; baseline 3 applies. The description adds no extra meaning about how vdom affects results or what happens when it is omitted (default null).

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: 'List virtual IP groups', and adds that member VIPs are included in the result. This distinguishes it from list_virtual_ips by resource type, but does not explicitly name or contrast with that sibling, leaving the agent to infer the group-vs-individual distinction.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus list_virtual_ips or get_virtual_ip_detail, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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