Список выделенных серверов

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

The description discloses the exact fields returned, including status values (installing/installed/on/off), location, specs, IPs, and price. Annotations do not declare read-only, but the description's 'returns list' implies a read operation. It adds useful scope context (account-level) beyond the annotations.

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 exactly two sentences: first states the primary action and output, second gives usage guidance. Every word is informative, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and what it returns. It also includes usage context. No gaps remain.

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 schema coverage is 100% vacuously. The description does not need to explain parameters. According to the baseline, 0 params warrants a score of 4; no additional parameter semantics are needed.

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 states a specific verb+resource: 'Возвращает список всех выделенных серверов аккаунта' (Returns list of all dedicated servers of the account), and enumerates the returned fields. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_project_dedicated or get_dedicated_server.

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 explicitly advises using this tool before operations on a dedicated server to obtain its ID. This provides clear context for when to use it, though it does not mention alternatives or when-not-to-use cases.

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