Create SDN vnet

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and possibly open-world. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., side effects, permission requirements, or what happens to resources). It simply restates the tool's purpose.

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 very concise (one short sentence) and front-loaded with the key purpose. However, it is so minimal that it omits potentially useful details, though it avoids verbosity.

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 has 6 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description is too brief to fully guide the agent. It fails to explain constraints, return values, or how this tool fits into the broader SDN workflow among many siblings.

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?

With only 17% schema description coverage, the description does not explain any parameters beyond what the schema provides. The schema itself lacks descriptions for most parameters (name, tag, alias, comment, vlanaware), and the tool description does not compensate.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('SDN virtual network'), and specifies 'zone-scoped', which helps distinguish it from related tools like create_sdn_subnet or create_sdn_zone.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_sdn_subnet). The zone-scoping hint is implicit, but there are no when-not-to-use conditions or prerequisites mentioned.

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