firewall_schedule_recurring_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'list', but does not mention safe mutation (read-only), pagination, or what happens with the 'vdom' parameter. The agent lacks essential behavioral context.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. However, it is overly terse and could incorporate more useful information without sacrificing brevity.

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 low complexity (one optional parameter), no annotations, and an output schema that presumably defines return structure, the description still fails to mention expected behavior (e.g., all schedules in VDOM, pagination, sorting). The agent may miss critical context.

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% due to the single 'vdom' parameter being well-documented in the JSON schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, achieving the baseline.

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 'List all recurring schedules' uses a clear verb ('List') and specifies the resource ('recurring schedules'). The tool name also includes 'recurring', which disambiguates from siblings like 'firewall_schedule_one_time_list', but the description itself does not explicitly differentiate.

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 (e.g., one-time schedules). No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent without decision support.

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