list_tier1_gateways

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. Description adds context about pagination (truncated) and standalone gateway behavior. No contradictions.

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?

Five sentences cover purpose, pagination, usage, standalone meaning, and parameter. Concise and well-structured, though slightly verbose in the usage sentence.

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 no output schema, the description explains the result envelope and truncated check, and hints at fields (Tier-0 path, route advertisement). Sufficient for a list tool, though could mention error handling.

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%, but the description provides minimal semantics: target is the NSX Manager target from config with default. This adds some context but lacks format or value constraints.

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 tool lists Tier-1 gateways with linked Tier-0 path and route advertisement, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_transport_nodes (different resource) and delete_tier1_gateway (different operation).

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?

Explicit guidance: use this first to resolve tier1_id for other tools (create_nat_rule, etc.), check truncated before assuming completeness, and then use get_tier1_gateway for detail. Also explains meaning of empty tier0_path.

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