list_vms

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real value beyond them by disclosing the result bound (1-200) and default (50), which the schema does not express as a range constraint.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in a single sentence, with parameters organized under a clear 'Args:' block. The four search examples are slightly more than needed, but each demonstrates a distinct query form so they largely earn their place.

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 two-parameter read-only listing tool with an output schema covering return values, the description is nearly complete: purpose, both parameters, and result limits are all addressed. Only error handling and ordering conventions are left unstated.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full load and does so well: it defines the search parameter's syntax with multiple domain-specific examples and gives the max_results range and default. It stops short of describing invalid-query behavior or result ordering.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List virtual machines') and enumerates the returned attributes (status, cluster, host, CPUs, memory). The plural list framing clearly separates it from the singular get_vm sibling.

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?

Gives concrete when-to-use guidance through four example search queries and explicitly states 'Leave empty to list all VMs.' It does not, however, name alternatives such as get_vm for single-VM lookups or explain when listing is preferable to a targeted fetch.

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