Список IP-адресов сервера

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

The description presents a read-only operation ('Возвращает' / returns), whereas the annotation declares readOnlyHint: false, creating a contradiction. This could mislead an agent about side effects. No further behavioral traits are disclosed beyond the contradiction.

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 front-loads the action and fully describes the result set without unnecessary words.

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?

The tool is simple but has no output schema, and the description does not detail the exact structure of the returned addresses. More importantly, the annotation contradiction (readOnlyHint false) undermines the description's clarity, making the tool's behavior ambiguous for an agent.

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 input schema already describes server_id as a required field. The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, which has 100% coverage, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states it returns all IPv4 and IPv6 addresses assigned to the server, including PTR records and the main IP flag. The verb 'Возвращает' (returns) and the resource 'серверу' (server) specify a distinct action from sibling tools like list_balancer_ips or add_server_ip.

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 when needing server IP addresses but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_server or list_servers, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternative tools. It provides no comparative guidance.

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