Retrieve all computes in a specific zone by supplying its zone ID, so you can inspect compute resources associated with that zone.
Get computes Get zone's computes by given zone ID GET /iaas/api/zones/{id}/computes
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The ID of the zone. (path) | |
| apiVersion | No | The version of the API in yyyy-MM-dd format (UTC). For versioning information refer to /iaas/api/about |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds no significant behavioral traits that are not already covered by the annotations. Since `readOnlyHint: true` and `destructiveHint: false` already define its safety profile, the description simply restates its functional nature as a data retrieval operation.
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 concise, consisting of two short sentences that front-load the resource and the filtering mechanism. There is no extraneous language.
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 definition is complete enough for an agent to correctly invoke the tool given the schema and annotations. However, it lacks information regarding pagination or potential rate limiting, which would improve completeness.
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 schema description coverage at 100%, the baseline score is 3. The description provides zero unique semantic information regarding the parameters, merely repeating that the zone ID is used to locate the computes.
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 is highly specific, using the verb 'Get' and immediately specifying the resource 'zone's computes'. It clearly identifies the scope of the tool—retrieving computes filtered by a zone ID.
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 provides a clear contextual requirement (needs a zone ID), but it offers no explicit guidance on when this tool should be chosen over other list operations (e.g., listing all computes without zone constraints).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.