list_cameras

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden, but 'List all cameras' honestly describes a read-only operation and includes the host resolution format ('console name, ID, or composite ID (MAC:numericId)'). It does not mention pagination or authentication, but the simple listing behavior is not misleading.

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 short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the host detail follows immediately, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 one-parameter list operation with an output schema present, the description covers the purpose and the only parameter's allowed formats. Minor details about pagination or filtering are not critical for this simple list scope.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It effectively explains that host accepts a console name, ID, or composite MAC:numericId format, giving the agent meaningful input guidance beyond the bare string type in the 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 clearly states the action ('List all cameras') and the scope ('on a Protect console'), specifying the resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like list_devices or get_camera, but 'cameras' and 'Protect console' are specific enough for an agent to infer the target.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_devices or get_camera, and no exclusions are mentioned. The only usage hint is the host parameter format, which is more about parameter input than decision context.

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