list_presets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: 'No token required' (auth requirements) and 'Current' (freshness of the listing), which are useful for an agent deciding whether it can call this anonymously.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its scope, followed by the usage cue. Every clause carries information; nothing is padding.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description is nearly sufficient: it explains what the list contains and when to use it. Minor omissions (return shape/pagination) are acceptable since no output schema exists but the tool's nature is a straightforward listing.

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 a single parameter at 100% schema coverage, the schema already documents location and its allowed values. The description contextualizes that a location drives both availability and pricing, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('list presets') and enriches it with the domain ('instant servers (VM/BM/GPU/vGPU) with prices for a location'), so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling search_presets, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

'Use to pick a preset before ordering' gives clear when-to-use context tied to the ordering workflow. It offers no explicit when-not-to-use or named alternative, so it lands at a solid 4 rather than 5.

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