Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• get_general_recommendationsC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, has side effects, or requires permissions. The description only states the action, providing minimal transparency.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single short sentence, concise and front-loaded with the core action. However, it lacks additional structure that could improve clarity, such as mentioning optionality or default behavior.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Despite low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, example usage, or what 'recommendations' entails, leaving agents with insufficient context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema covers 100% of parameters with a description for 'subscription_filter'. The tool description adds no further meaning, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage but does not enrich semantics.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool retrieves 'strategic purchasing and licensing optimization recommendations', specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_savings_summary or get_sku_optimizations, which could overlap in purpose.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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

• get_savings_summaryA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states aggregation and merging results across subscriptions, but does not disclose read-only nature, potential cost, or other behavioral traits.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  A single sentence that efficiently conveys the core function without unnecessary words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but does not specify the output format or further behavioral details. It states what is aggregated but not the structure of the summary.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% with a clear description of the optional subscription filter and default behavior. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what is already in the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'aggregate' and the resource 'savings totals' across specific categories (idle resources, SKU rightsizing, general recommendations), distinguishing it from sibling tools that provide details.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives. The context implies it is for aggregated totals while siblings provide granular data, but no direct when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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

• get_sku_optimizationsA
  3.6/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  The description implies a read-only operation but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic purpose. With no annotations, it carries the full burden but is acceptable for a simple retrieval tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence with no waste, front-loaded with the core purpose.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Adequately describes the tool's purpose for a simple one-parameter retrieval, though lacking output schema details would be a minor gap.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with a clear description for the only parameter, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'rightsizing recommendations for overprovisioned resources', clearly differentiating from siblings like get_general_recommendations and get_idle_resources.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings; the description only states what it does without context on alternatives or prerequisites.

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

• get_idle_resourcesA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states retrieval of resources and hints at safe operation ('can be deleted'), but omits side effects, auth needs, rate limits, or return format details.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence with verb first, no unnecessary words. Efficiently conveys purpose and context.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple tool with one optional param and no output schema, the description covers purpose and the deletion/deallocation intent. Lack of output format explanation is minor; tool is complete enough for agent use.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with a clear field description for subscription_filter. The tool description adds context but no new parameter details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('Retrieve'), the resource ('idle and zombie Azure resources'), and the purpose ('for cost savings'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_savings_summary, which return aggregated data, not individual resources.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies the tool is for cost-saving purposes, but does not explicitly state when to use it over siblings like get_general_recommendations or get_sku_optimizations. No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use.

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