zia_list_gre_ranges

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating safe read access. The description adds no behavioral details (e.g., pagination, limit behavior, or response structure). It does not contradict annotations.

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, concise sentence. However, it is too brief and lacks structure to fully inform the agent. A slightly longer description with parameter hints would improve without losing conciseness.

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?

With no output schema, limited parameter descriptions, and minimal annotation, the description is inadequate. It does not explain what GRE internal-IP ranges are or how to effectively use the optional filters.

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 low (25%) with only the 'query' parameter described. The description does not explain the meaning of limit, static_ip, or internal_ip_range, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 ZIA GRE internal-IP ranges, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like zia_list_gre_tunnels or 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as for filtering by IP range or static IP. The description lacks context on the intended use case compared to siblings.

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