list_site_to_site_tunnels

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation and site scoping is stated, but there is no explicit statement that no changes are made, nor any mention of caveats such as permissions or pagination. It is not misleading, but it is minimal.

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 front-loaded sentences: the first states the action and resource, the second lists parameter formats. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or repetition.

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 operation with an output schema, the description covers the essentials: both parameters are explained and the return shape is presumably covered by the output schema. The only noticeable gap is the absence of explicit behavioral or alternative-tool guidance.

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 prose must explain the parameters—and it does. It defines host as 'console name, ID, or composite ID (MAC:numericId format)' and site as 'site name or ID,' giving an agent concrete selection guidance beyond the bare string types 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List site-to-site VPN tunnels for a site.' It is clear about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from related siblings like list_vpn_servers or create/update/delete_site_to_site_tunnel.

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 phrase 'for a site' implies a scoped use case, but the description gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or direct agents to sibling tools for different scenarios.

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