list-network-devices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that devices are monitored by Datadog NDM but fails to disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication requirements, or the nature of the operation (e.g., read-only). The presence of pagination parameters is not reflected in the description.

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 9-word sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the main action and object. It avoids unnecessary words but could include more detail without becoming verbose. Minor improvement possible.

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 4 optional parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not mention that the tool supports pagination, sorting, or filtering, nor does it describe the return type or structure. A more complete description would include these core features.

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 100% with clear descriptions for all parameters (sort, pageSize, filterTag, pageNumber). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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') and the resource ('network devices') with specific examples of device types (routers, switches, firewalls) and the context of Datadog NDM monitoring. This distinguishes it clearly from siblings like 'get-network-device' and other list tools.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for listing network devices, but there is no explicit mention of conditions, exclusions, or references to sibling tools like 'get-network-device' for detailed device information.

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