VDI Host Pools

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

Annotations already indicate this is a read-only, non-destructive, idempotent operation with open-world data. The description adds valuable context by specifying what information is included in the listing ('pool members, provisioning settings, and capacity'), which helps the agent understand the output scope beyond the basic safety profile.

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 concise sentences: the first states what the tool does and what it includes, the second provides specific use cases. Every word adds value, with no repetition or fluff, making it efficiently front-loaded and well-structured.

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 read-only tool with 0 parameters and comprehensive annotations, the description is nearly complete. It explains the output content and use cases well. A slight deduction because there's no output schema, and the description doesn't mention format or pagination, but this is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose and output, not parameters, earning a high baseline score for compensating with semantic clarity about what data is retrieved.

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 ('List'), the resource ('VDI host pool configuration'), and specific components ('pool members, provisioning settings, and capacity'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'ras_infra_get_rds_hostpools' by specifying VDI rather than RDS pools, making the purpose specific and differentiated.

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 this tool: 'to review VDI pool composition, check desktop provisioning status, or verify pool sizing.' It provides clear use cases without needing to mention alternatives, as the tool's scope is well-defined and distinct from siblings.

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