Retrieve all IaaS load balancers to inspect or manage network traffic distribution. Use the optional API version parameter to target a specific schema version.
Get load balancers Get all load balancers GET /iaas/api/load-balancers
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond that — no pagination behavior, no return shape, no note about the apiVersion parameter's effect.
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?
It is short and front-loaded, but two of the three lines restate the same fact and the third is an endpoint literal, so the text is redundant rather than dense with information.
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 unauthenticated-looking read of a collection with a fully documented single parameter and complete annotations, little prose is strictly required. Still, nothing is said about result volume, pagination, or when the endpoint returns an empty list, leaving the agent to infer behavior.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% and the single apiVersion parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning, 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?
The description states the resource and that it returns 'all' load balancers, which implies a list operation, but it does not distinguish this from siblings such as iaas_get_load_balancer (single) or iaas_scale_load_balancer. The second line simply repeats the first, and the third is a raw REST path rather than added meaning.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives like iaas_get_load_balancer for a single record. Usage is only inferable from the word 'all'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.