vmware-nsx-security

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

With no annotations provided, description carries full burden. Discloses critical mutation behavior ('Existing tags... preserved — this operation is additive') and prerequisite dependency. Lacks disclosure on idempotency, permissions, or error states, preventing a perfect score.

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?

Excellent structure: purpose statement → behavior clarification → prerequisite instruction → parameter details. Every sentence earns its place. Args section is necessary given zero schema descriptions, making the length appropriate rather than verbose.

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?

For a 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, description provides sufficient context: clear purpose, behavioral constraints, prerequisite workflow, and complete parameter semantics. Agent has enough information to invoke correctly without additional metadata.

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%, requiring description to fully compensate. Richly documents all 4 parameters: vm_id includes format (fabric UUID) and source (list_vm_tags), tag_scope/value include concrete examples (env/tier/production), target explains origin (config). Fully compensates for schema deficiency.

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?

Description opens with specific verb 'Apply' + resource 'NSX tag' + target 'virtual machine'. Explicitly distinguishes behavioral model as 'additive' versus destructive replacement, clarifying intent among sibling tagging 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?

Explicitly states prerequisite workflow: 'Use list_vm_tags to get the vm_id... first'. Clarifies when-not-to-use implicitly by specifying the ID source. The additive behavior note guides selection over hypothetical replacement operations.

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