Filters OpenStack instances by status such as ACTIVE, SHUTOFF, ERROR, or BUILDING so you can find and troubleshoot instances in a specific state.
Get instances filtered by status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| status | Yes | Instance status to filter by (ACTIVE, SHUTOFF, ERROR, BUILDING, etc.) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.5.8Input schema / properties / status / descriptionAdded value: +"Instance status to filter by (ACTIVE, SHUTOFF, ERROR, BUILDING, etc.)"v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The word 'Get' implies a read operation, but the description does not disclose pagination, permissions, or other read-behavior details beyond the operation type.
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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant or wasted wording. It is appropriately sized for a simple filtered-list tool.
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, has a fully described single parameter, and has an output schema, so the description is sufficient for invocation. However, it lacks context for selecting this tool over sibling tools such as search_instances.
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 single parameter has 100% schema description coverage, including example status values. The description repeats that filtering is by status but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema, fitting the baseline of 3 when schema coverage is high.
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 gives a clear verb and resource: it gets instances and filters them by status. It is specific enough to distinguish the tool from generic instance retrieval, but it does not explicitly differentiate it from the sibling tool search_instances.
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 the tool is used when filtering by status, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use it versus search_instances or other sibling tools. There are no exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.