cloud_list_floating_ips

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavior. It only states 'List', implying a read operation, but fails to disclose that results support pagination (page, per_page) and filtering (name, label_selector). This omission risks the agent expecting unfiltered results.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. Key information about pagination and filtering is missing, so the single sentence does not earn its place by providing adequate value.

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?

Given the tool has 4 optional parameters and an output schema, the description should mention filtering and pagination capabilities. Its brevity leaves significant gaps, especially when compared to the rich context provided by sibling tools.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter explanations in the description, the agent must infer meaning from parameter names alone. This is insufficient for robust tool invocation, especially given optional filtering parameters.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'floating IPs', making the basic purpose obvious. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling list tools like cloud_list_servers or cloud_list_networks, missing the top-tier criteria for sibling differentiation.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of appropriate contexts, prerequisites, or when to avoid using it, leaving the agent to guess based solely on the name.

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