yougpu_list_gpus

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool lists models with price ranges and stock, indicating a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly mention side effects, authentication requirements, or any pagination/live data behavior. The description is minimal but not misleading.

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, concise sentence that conveys all necessary information without redundancy. Every part of the sentence adds value: the action, the object, and the content details.

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?

For a simple zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose and what data is returned (price ranges and stock). It could mention whether results are paginated or sorted, but these are not critical for a catalog list. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for this complexity level.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema already provides complete coverage (100%). The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline of 4 is appropriate since there is no parameter complexity to address.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource 'GPU models' within the 'YouGPU catalog', adding details about price ranges and stock. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_offers and list_instances, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 (to see available GPU models and pricing) but provides no explicit context for when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or scenarios where another list tool would be more appropriate, so guidance is only implicit.

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