list_fleetsThe three live fleet roots — Global, APAC, LATAM — with regions, slot ranges, and entry points. Headline: 32,597 LIVE AI Agents — the 32,500+ AI Agent program: 19,597 Carriers on the fleet roots and 14 sovereign nodes, 3,000 on the APP surfaces, 10,000 AI Orderability (AIO) Agents on the ten gsc-marketplace.ai hosts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does convey what data the tool surfaces — the three fleet roots, associated regions, slot ranges, entry points, and headline agent counts. However, it never explicitly states that this is a read-only listing, nor does it mention freshness, pagination, or any operational caveats.
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 first sentence is concise and informative. The second sentence is a dense, promotional jumble of numbers and program names that adds questionable value for an agent deciding how to call the tool. Some structure would help, but the overall description is still short.
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 parameterless list tool, the description covers the main content of the result: the three fleet roots with regions, slot ranges, and entry points. However, it does not specify the response structure, and the headline statistics are ambiguously presented, leaving some uncertainty about what exactly the tool returns and in what format.
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?
The input schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. This matches the baseline for a parameterless tool: no additional parameter documentation is needed.
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 tool lists the three live fleet roots (Global, APAC, LATAM) and their regions, slot ranges, and entry points. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the title reinforces this. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'get_fleet', but the plural 'fleets' and the enumerated roots make the scope reasonably clear.
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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use list_fleets versus alternatives like get_fleet or get_fleet_stats. Usage is only implied by the phrase 'live fleet roots.' There are no conditions, exclusions, or mentions of related tools, so an agent gets little help choosing this over a more specific fleet tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
find_carriers and resolve_jurisdiction both take member codes and return routing or residency endpoint information, making their boundaries unclear. list_fleets and get_fleet_stats also overlap by both publishing live agent counts and fleet-level headline numbers.
Most tools follow a consistent get_/list_/resolve_ + noun pattern, which makes the set easy to scan. how_to_transact breaks the verb convention, and get_carrier_doctrine is less operational in tone, but these are minor deviations.
Ten tools is well-scoped for a read-only fleet discovery, residency, and routing server. Each tool maps to a distinct operational concern such as routing, fleet listing, jurisdiction lookup, or transaction guidance.
The server covers fleet discovery, carrier resolution, jurisdiction lookup, and transaction guidance, but it lacks a tool to fetch an individual carrier's detailed record or card content directly. There is also no carrier-level list or search beyond member-code lookup, which is a notable gap for a Carrier Class Fleet server.