infomaniak_list_public_clouds

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

The description adds the scoping detail 'available to the current account,' and the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint) already cover the safety and idempotency profile. It does not contradict annotations and provides a small amount of additional context, but no further behavioral details like pagination or output format are disclosed.

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, focused sentence with no filler, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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's simplicity, empty schema, and presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose and scope. It does not need to explain return values, and the context is adequate for selection among siblings.

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, and the schema coverage is 100% (no params to describe). The description adds no parameter-specific information, but with no parameters, the baseline of 4 is 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 uses 'List' as a verb and specifies 'Public Cloud products available to the current account' as the resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_public_cloud_projects and get_public_cloud.

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 its use case via the resource scope but does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. Sibling tools are widely varied, and no direct comparison is given.

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