get_idle_load_balancers

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses cost implications and defines detection criteria (thresholds, 14-day period), but does not mention permissions, destructive actions, or whether it returns IDs or names.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then includes parameter details and example queries. It's clear but could be slightly more concise by removing examples.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of ARNs, names, cost data). It adequately describes inputs but lacks output details.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explains both parameters: regions (defaults to all opted-in) and request_threshold (default 100). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 starts with 'Detect ALBs, NLBs, and Classic ELBs with near-zero traffic over the past 14 days.' It uses a specific verb (Detect) and resource (load balancers), and clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_idle_rds_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?

No explicit guidance on when or when not to use this tool versus alternatives like list_idle_resources. The examples show user queries but do not differentiate from other audit tools in the sibling list.

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