list_device_ipsec_phase2_interfaces

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the read-only nature ('list', 'VDOM to read') and the shape of the response (a dict with device, vdom, count, interfaces), but says nothing about permissions, behavior when the device or VDOM does not exist, or result volume.

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?

Front-loaded one-line purpose followed by compact Args/Returns sections; nothing is padded. The Returns block is partly redundant given an output schema exists, which keeps it from a 5.

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 two-parameter read-only list tool with an output schema present, the description covers purpose, both arguments, the default VDOM, and the response shape — enough to call it correctly. Missing only edge-case behavior and error conditions.

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 must carry parameter meaning, and it does define both parameters ('device: Managed device name', 'vdom: VDOM to read, default "root"'). The explanations are minimal and add little beyond the schema titles/defaults — no format, scoping, or validity details.

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 first sentence names a specific verb and resource ('List IPsec phase2-interface (tunnel/selector) definitions in a device's device DB'), which clearly separates it from the get/create/update/delete phase2 siblings. However, it never explicitly redirects to get_device_ipsec_phase2_interface for a single object, leaving that differentiation to the reader's inference.

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?

Usage is only implied by the verb 'List' plus the required 'device' argument; there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_device_ipsec_phase2_interface or the phase1 list tool. No prerequisites, no exclusions.

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