linode_find_gpu_availability

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so no safety concern. The description adds value by detailing the return structure (price, regions, separate listing for marketing SKUs) and optional region filtering, which goes beyond bare read-only indication.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loading the main purpose. Every sentence adds essential information with no redundancy or filler.

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 the simple input (one optional parameter) and presence of an output schema, the description fully covers the tool's behavior. It mentions output content (price, regions, marketing SKUs) and optional scoping.

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% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'region' is optional and scopes results, which adds meaning beyond the raw schema. However, it does not specify format or allowed values.

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 tool finds GPU and accelerated compute plans and their availability, specifying the classes (NVIDIA RTX, NETINT VPU) and what is returned (price, regions). It distinguishes from other tools by focusing on GPU and accelerated plans.

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 explains when to use the tool (to find GPU/accelerated plans and availability) and optional region scoping. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to select appropriately among siblings.

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