list_clusters

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It explains default output (compact summaries) and verbose behavior (full configs). It also notes the account_id default environment variable. However, it does not mention if the operation is read-only, rate limits, or pagination. For a list tool, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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: three lines for behavior, then an args section. Every sentence serves a purpose. Front-loaded with the main action. No redundancy or fluff.

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 presence of an output schema and only two simple parameters, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains default vs verbose output and account_id behavior. It does not cover authentication prerequisites or environment variable setup beyond mention, but that is acceptable for a list tool within a suite of related tools.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, so description must compensate. It does so fully: account_id is explained with an example and default, verbose is explained with usage recommendations. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema, meeting the baseline of 4 for 0 params and exceeding it with clarity.

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 it lists AWS Ocean Kubernetes clusters in a Spotinst account. It specifies the resource and scope, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'list_all_clusters' or 'list_clusters_azure', which could confuse an agent. The name and context imply AWS specificity, but direct comparison would improve clarity.

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 provides implicit usage guidance: default returns compact summaries, verbose for full configs, and it recommends using verbose for analysis. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it provide 'when not to use' scenarios. An example: 'Use list_all_clusters to see all clusters regardless of type' would be helpful.

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