list_transport_zones

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds output structure (id, display_name, transport_type) and error behavior ('passing the wrong one is rejected'). No contradiction.

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?

Description is well-structured: brief purpose, usage guidance, output details, parameter note. Could be slightly more concise, but no extraneous information.

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 simple list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, output fields, parameter, and error behavior. Complete for an agent to use effectively.

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?

Input schema has 0% coverage (no descriptions). Description explains the 'target' parameter: 'NSX Manager target from config (default if omitted).' This adds essential meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 'List all NSX transport zones' and explains they are overlay/VLAN boundaries. It specifies scope ('all') and distinguishes from siblings like list_transport_nodes.

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 says 'Use this first when building a segment' and explains how the output is used to form transport_zone_path. Also differentiates between VLAN-backed and overlay zones. Missing explicit when-not-to-use, but guidance is clear.

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