List GPUs

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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: prices are live, denominated in US dollars per GPU per hour, stock is included, and results are sorted cheapest first. It does not explain sales-availability defaults, but the schema covers that.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the resource and immediately gives price units, stock inclusion, and sort order. There is no wasted text.

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?

With rich annotations, full schema coverage, and an output schema, the description supplies the key missing context: price currency/unit and ordering. It could mention filtering behavior briefly, but the structured fields carry the rest adequately.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 identifies the resource as GPUs and states that live prices and stock are returned, with cheapest-first ordering. It lacks an explicit verb but the tool name supplies that, and it distinguishes itself reasonably from sibling list tools like list_machines and list_apps.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_machines or list_apps, nor any mention of prerequisites. The usage is only implied by the resource name and returned data.

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