Get Instances

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description adds conceptual context about what resource instances are rather than additional behavioral traits. It does not mention pagination or error behavior, but for a read-only list operation this is acceptable.

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 two sentences with no fluff. It places the operation up front and adds a brief explanatory sentence about instances, making it easy to scan.

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 1-parameter read-only operation with an output schema, the description is adequate. It could be improved by explicitly noting the relationship to describe_instance for single-instance details, but the core operational context is present.

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 provides a complete description for the single parameter resource_name, covering 100% of parameter semantics. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail beyond restating the resource name.

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 the tool retrieves all instances for a Lifecycle Manager resource, with a specific verb and object. It does not explicitly name alternative tools like describe_instance, but the scope is distinct from sibling tools such as get_resources and describe_resource.

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 you need to list all instances of a resource, but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over describe_instance or other related operations. No exclusions or alternative tool references are given.

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