zones_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses automatic pagination but does not mention other behavioral traits such as whether the listing is exhaustive, whether it highlights errors for missing workspaces, or if any permissions are required beyond basic access.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences. The first sentence gives the core purpose, and the second adds the key behavioral note on pagination. No extraneous words.

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 that there is no output schema, the description could be more complete by specifying what the response contains (e.g., list of zone names, IDs). However, for a simple listing tool with automatic pagination, the description provides enough context for an agent to use it correctly. The lack of output description is a minor gap.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all parameters, so the description does not need to add much. It does add context by tying 'maxPages' and 'pageToken' to automatic pagination, but this is a minor addition beyond what the schema already says.

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 ('List'), resource ('GTM zones'), and scope ('in a workspace'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like zones_create and zones_get by specifying 'list' and mentioning automatic pagination.

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 implicit guidance by stating automatic pagination but does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., zones_get for a single zone) or when not to use it (e.g., if you need to create/update zones).

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