list_virtual_machine_instances

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It correctly states the tool lists running instances with specific fields, implying read-only behavior. However, it lacks disclosure of auth needs, rate limits, or pagination, though these are less critical for a simple listing.

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 a single sentence, concise and to the point, with no wasted words. It achieves maximum efficiency for the information provided.

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?

The tool is simple with two optional parameters and an output schema (as indicated). The description covers the basic function but neglects to explain the filtering parameters, making it incomplete for effective use despite the output schema being present.

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%, and the description adds no information about the two parameters (cluster, namespace). While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description should explain their role as optional filters. This gap could confuse an AI agent.

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 running VirtualMachineInstances and specifies the included fields (node, IP, phase). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_virtual_machines which likely list all VMs.

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 usage for listing running VM instances, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives (e.g., list_virtual_machines, get_virtual_machine). No exclusions or context provided.

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