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. It explicitly says 'Read-only' and states the required permission (processors:read), which tells the agent this is a safe, scoped read operation. It does not mention pagination or error behavior, but for a simple list tool this is adequate.

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?

One dense sentence packs in the resource, the returned fields, the required scope, and the read-only nature. No filler or redundancy.

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 a simple one-parameter list operation with no output schema. The description fully covers what is listed, which fields are returned, the permission needed, and that it is read-only; an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the computeApiKey parameter. The description adds meaning by tying the key to a wallet and specifying the required processors:read scope, which is not in the schema and helps the agent provide the correct key.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('processors published by the wallet behind a compute API key'), and clarifies the returned fields (status, price, paused, listed). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like cloud_list_instances or cloud_list_pods.

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 clearly states what the tool lists and the required scope ('needs processors:read'), and marks it as read-only. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the purpose is specific enough that an agent can decide correctly.

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