zia_list_gre_tunnels

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

The description redundantly states 'read-only' which is already provided by annotations (readOnlyHint=true). It adds mention of JMESPath filtering but lacks details on pagination, rate limits, or error behavior.

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 front-loads the core purpose. Every word is informative and no unnecessary content.

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 presence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers the key feature (JMESPath filtering). It lacks some context like prerequisites or error handling, but is adequate for a simple list operation.

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 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description's mention of JMESPath filtering aligns with the schema's parameter description, adding no new meaning. Baseline 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 verb 'List', the resource 'ZIA GRE tunnels', and notes it's read-only. It distinguishes from sibling tools like zia_list_gre_ranges by specifying 'tunnels'.

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 implies usage for listing all GRE tunnels, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like zia_get_gre_tunnel for a single tunnel. No usage exclusions or conditions are given.

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