floating_ip_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'on the account' clarifies scope. However, it does not state any potential permissions, rate limits, or whether the operation is safe/read-only beyond the inherent meaning of 'list.' It is minimally adequate but not detailed.

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 is front-loaded with the action and resource. There is no wasted wording or redundancy, making it perfectly concise.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete. It specifies what is listed and the scope. However, it does not describe the format or fields of the returned list, which might be useful since no output schema is provided. Still, for a simple list, this is sufficient.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema has no properties, so schema coverage is effectively 100%. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds no parameter information because none exists. This 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 the verb ('list') and resource ('floating IPs'), and specifies the scope ('on the account'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vm_iplist, which might focus on VM IPs, and vm_list, which lists VMs. The purpose is unambiguous.

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, nor does it mention any exclusions. While the name and description imply usage for viewing floating IPs, there is no explicit comparison with sibling tools (e.g., vm_iplist) or edge cases where another tool would be more appropriate.

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