list_servers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds pagination info ('one page') and mentions the include parameter, but does not disclose the response format or any other behavioral details beyond what annotations already provide.

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 sentence, front-loaded, and to the point. It avoids unnecessary words while conveying the core action and a useful parameter hint.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description does not clarify the response structure. It also lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools. However, the annotations cover safety, and the pagination parameters are present in the schema, making the description minimally adequate for a simple list operation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description partially compensates by explaining that 'include may contain node, egg, or allocations.' However, it does not describe the 'page' or 'per_page' parameters, though their defaults and names give some hints. The description adds value for include but not for the other two parameters.

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 action with a specific verb and resource: 'List one page of servers.' It also mentions the include parameter, but does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like server_details or server_status.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as server_details or server_status. It only states the action and gives a hint about the include parameter, leaving the agent without a basis for tool selection.

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