list_nets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it never states that this is a read-only operation, what 'resolved' means, whether results are paginated, or what the response structure is. The output schema exists but its content isn't disclosed here, so the agent is left without context on side effects or safety.

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?

A single, concise sentence with no wasted words. The key action and optional filtering are presented upfront. Structure is efficient, though it could benefit from one more sentence on usage guidance.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional param) and has an output schema, so the description needn't explain return values. However, given that no annotations exist, the lack of any statement about read-only nature or how it relates to sibling tools leaves the context incomplete for guiding an agent to correct usage.

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%, but the description adds meaning to the single 'query' parameter by stating it can filter 'by net name or connected pin.' However, it doesn't specify the exact format (e.g., whether it's a substring, exact match, or how to combine name+pin), so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 states a clear verb-resource pair: 'List resolved nets' with optional filtering. This distinguishes it from sibling get_net (which implies fetching a single net), though it doesn't explicitly state the difference. The filtering clause adds specificity.

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 vs alternatives like get_net or trace_signal. The description implies a listing/filtering role but doesn't state conditions or exclusions. An agent must infer when list_nets is preferred over other net-related tools.

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