linode_list_vpcs

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by specifying that the listing includes region and description, and importantly states that subnets are not included, which is not obvious from annotations or schema.

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, each earning its place: first states purpose and included fields, second clarifies what is not included. No wasted words.

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 an output schema exists, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and boundary. However, the missing parameter guidance prevents full completeness, especially for a tool with only one parameter.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the 'detail' parameter, and the description does not mention the parameter at all. The agent receives no guidance on what 'detail' does or when to use 'concise' vs 'full'.

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 lists VPCs with their region and description, and explicitly distinguishes from get_vpc by noting that subnets are returned by get_vpc, not here.

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 implies that for subnets one should use get_vpc, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other listing tools or provide exclusions.

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