list_clusters

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the read-only nature and the returned fields. It does not mention any potential side effects or constraints, but for a simple list operation this is adequate. Minor improvement could note that it returns all clusters without pagination.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence defines the action and output, the second provides usage context. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description still lists the key returned fields. It provides enough context for an agent to understand what the tool returns and when to use it. The absence of output schema is compensated by the description's inventory of outputs.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description does not need to add parameter information. Baseline 4 is appropriate as there are no parameters to explain.

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 it inventories all clusters under Prism Central with specific returned fields (names, ext IDs, health status, version, resource summary). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_cluster (single cluster) by focusing on listing all clusters.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: to understand cluster topology, check fleet health, or find a specific cluster for VM placement. However, it does not mention when not to use it or explicitly point to alternatives like get_cluster for a single cluster, which would strengthen the guidance.

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