create_segment

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

Discloses PUT semantics (idempotent behavior even though annotation is false), audit logging, error return structure. Does not contradict annotations; adds context beyond annotations which are minimal.

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?

Well-structured with title line, prerequisites, usage, return values, and args. Slightly long but each sentence adds value. Could be more compact but still efficient.

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 6 params (3 required), no output schema, the description covers all aspects: operation, prerequisites, overwrite behavior, return values (success and error), audit logging, and detailed parameter descriptions. No gaps.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section explains all 6 parameters with format, examples, and when to omit. Adds meaning for segment_id (policy path), vlan_ids (comma/hyphen separated), subnet (gateway vs network address), and target (default from config).

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Create', resource 'NSX network segment', and distinguishes overlay vs VLAN-backed. Differentiates from siblings like delete_segment, update_segment. The description provides specific action and resource.

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: 'get the transport zone from list_transport_zones first.' Provides guidance on when to use subnet vs vlan_ids. Notes that re-running with same segment_id overwrites (PUT semantics). Does not explicitly mention alternatives like update_segment, but the overwrite note covers use cases.

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