Load Balancing

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful context about what information is retrieved (settings for diagnosis) without contradicting annotations, though it doesn't mention rate limits or authentication needs.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste: first states purpose and scope, second provides usage guidelines. Every word earns its place, and information is front-loaded.

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 rich annotations and no parameters, the description is complete enough. It explains what's retrieved and when to use it, though without an output schema, it doesn't detail return format (e.g., JSON structure).

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters but adds value by explaining what settings are retrieved (balancing method, resource weights, session limits).

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 specific action ('Get load balancing settings') and resource ('RDS hosts'), distinguishing it from siblings like ras_site_get_ad_integration or ras_site_get_printing. It specifies the scope includes balancing method, resource weights, and session limits.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool: 'to review how sessions are distributed across RDS hosts or diagnose uneven load distribution.' This provides clear context and distinguishes it from general performance or configuration tools.

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