server_fleet

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by detailing the returned fields and the sort functionality, but does not cover potential concerns like pagination or data freshness.

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?

Three sentences: first outlines purpose and returns, second guides on sort usage, third provides alternative tool. Front-loaded, no redundancy, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, optional parameters, existing output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, what it returns, how to customize, and when to use an alternative.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'Use sort parameter to order results' which matches the schema, and does not further explain 'categories'. No significant additional meaning.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves fleet-wide health and security posture for all servers, listing specific returned fields. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'server_info' by noting what server_info does instead.

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?

Explicitly advises using server_info for per-server cloud status or available server sizes, providing a clear alternative. Also mentions using the sort parameter, guiding the agent on how to order results.

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