list_vpc_networks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'List all VPC networks' without disclosing whether it is read-only, how folder_id filters results, pagination behavior, or any authentication requirements. This minimal information leaves the agent unaware of behavioral nuances.

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 unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and easily parsed, making it ideal for quick comprehension.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description is incomplete: it omits any explanation of folder_id, the scope of 'all' (e.g., current folder or entire cloud), or return format. With no annotations or output schema, the agent lacks critical context for correct invocation.

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?

The schema has one optional parameter, folder_id, with no description (0% coverage). The description does not mention folder_id at all, so the agent cannot infer its meaning or effect. Since the description fails to compensate for the schemas lack of detail, parameter semantics are insufficient.

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 and resource: 'List all VPC networks.' It differentiates from sibling tools like list_vpc_subnets by specifying the resource type. However, it doesn't mention the optional folder_id parameter, so the scope of 'all' is slightly ambiguous.

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 is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. There is no mention of how folder_id affects the call or how this relates to other listing tools. The description offers no exclusions or alternative suggestions.

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