openstack-mcp

list_flavors

Read-only

List available instance flavors with vCPU, RAM, and disk specifications to select appropriate sizes for workloads.

Instructions

List available flavors (instance sizes) with vCPU, RAM, and disk.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_flavors"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and there's no destructive action, so the description does not need to repeat that. The description adds useful context by specifying that flavors are instance sizes and that the output includes vCPU, RAM, and disk, which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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?

One concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'List' and immediately states the resource and key attributes. No redundant information.

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?

While the tool is simple and has an output schema, the description omits any mention of the 'limit' parameter. For a listing tool with an optional limit, the description should at least hint at its purpose (e.g., 'with optional limit on number of flavors returned'). Without that, the description is incomplete for the parameter. However, given it's a simple list and output schema exists, it's otherwise sufficient.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The description does not mention the 'limit' parameter at all. Schema coverage is 0% (the schema has no description field), so the description must compensate, but it doesn't. An agent would not know what 'limit' does without external knowledge, making this a significant gap.

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 tool's purpose: 'List available flavors (instance sizes) with vCPU, RAM, and disk.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_servers or list_images by focusing on flavors and their attributes.

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 implicitly indicates usage: to get a list of flavor options with resource specs. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or any exclusions. Given the simplicity of the tool and the sibling list (cloud_info, list_servers, etc.), the purpose is clear enough, but explicit guidance is missing.

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

Deploy Server