hmc_list_network_bridges

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a read-only operation, lowering the bar. The description adds context about the parameter accepting a name or UUID, but does not disclose output format, pagination, or other behavioral details beyond what the annotation provides.

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 two sentences with no redundant information. The purpose is stated first, then the parameter explanation follows, making it front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 list tool with one parameter, an output schema, and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is adequate. It explains what the tool does and how to obtain the required system identifier. The potential ambiguity with hmc_list_sea_adapters is not addressed, but the description itself is complete enough for selection.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining that system_name_or_uuid accepts either a SystemName or a UUID and references hmc_systems to find it. This goes beyond the raw schema, which only declares the parameter as a string.

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 tool lists NetworkBridges (Shared Ethernet Adapters) on a managed system, using a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling hmc_list_sea_adapters, which likely refers to the same concept, but the parenthetical clarification adds specificity.

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 implies usage by explaining that the system_name_or_uuid parameter can be found with hmc_systems, giving some context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like hmc_list_sea_adapters or provide exclusion criteria.

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