plan_list_vc2_plans

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. 'List' and 'Returns VC2 plans in requested format' make clear this is a read operation and show that output format is controllable. However, it does not mention pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether the list is complete.

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 compact and well-structured with Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds useful information and the core purpose is front-loaded. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 an output schema and only one optional parameter, the description covers the essential invocation details. It could be slightly more complete by addressing sibling boundaries, but for a simple list operation the provided information is sufficient.

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 0%, so the description is fully responsible for parameter meaning. It explains the format parameter, names the accepted values ('compact' or 'json'), and states the default. This fully compensates for the sparse schema.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'List VC2 (Virtual Cloud Compute) plans.' This is clear and distinguishes the tool from generic plan tools by the VC2 qualifier. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling plan listers like plan_list_plans, so slightly short of a 5.

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 when VC2 plans are needed, but it does not explain when to prefer this over plan_list_plans, plan_list_vhf_plans, or plan_list_voc_plans. There is no explicit alternative routing or exclusion guidance, only the category in the name and description.

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