List FTP logins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the FTP/SFTP scope but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond that, such as whether passwords are returned or any permission requirements. This is adequate given the annotation coverage, but lacking extra context.

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 description is a single concise sentence that effectively communicates the tool's purpose without redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded and contains no wasted words.

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 the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficiently complete. It identifies the resource type and the nature of the data returned. However, it could optionally mention that it specifically targets FTP/SFTP logins and possibly note the distinction from FTP settings, but this is not a significant gap.

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 schema description covers 100% of parameters, with resource_id described as 'vCDN resource ID'. The description's mention of 'Video CDN resource' reinforces but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. With full schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 FTP/SFTP logins of a Video CDN resource,' specifying a specific verb (list), resource type (FTP/SFTP logins), and scope (Video CDN resource). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_vcdn_ftp_settings, which deals with settings rather than logins.

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 implies usage when FTP/SFTP login details are needed for a Video CDN resource, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention any exclusions. Sibling tools such as get_vcdn_ftp_settings are not referenced, so guidance is only implicit, not explicit.

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