list_nfregex_services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it does not state that the operation is read-only, safe, or any other behavioral traits (e.g., no side effects, no authentication requirements). The name 'list' implies a fetch, but additional context is missing.

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 a single sentence that is concise, front-loaded with the action word 'List', and contains no redundant or unnecessary information. Every word earns its place.

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's simplicity (no parameters, output schema present), the description is adequate. It explains what an nfregex service is, which is helpful context. However, it could briefly mention that the output will contain a list of such services, though the output schema presumably fills that 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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline score is 4. The description adds no parameter-level information, but none is needed as the schema is empty. The definition of an nfregex service provides context beyond 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 'List' and resource 'nfregex services', and further clarifies what a 'Firegex service' represents (one TCP/UDP port being filtered). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add, get, update, delete, and other list tools (list_nfproxy_services, list_phj_services).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that one should use this to retrieve all nfregex services, or when to prefer get_nfregex_service for a single service, or how it compares to similar list tools for other service types.

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