futurevuls_get_servers

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

The description indicates a read operation ('acquire'), but with no annotations provided, it fails to disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. Mentions of pagination and filtering hint at safety, but not explicitly.

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 one sentence with two clauses. It front-loads the main action and supporting features with zero waste.

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?

While the description covers the main purpose and features, it omits details about the output format or return fields, which is important since no output schema is provided. For a list tool, knowing what data is returned (e.g., server IDs, names, status) is crucial for agent decision-making.

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 coverage is 100% with all parameters documented. The description adds a high-level statement about supporting pagination and filtering, which aligns with the parameters but does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get server list' (サーバ一覧を取得) and mentions pagination and filtering, distinguishing it from sibling tools like futurevuls_get_group_members or futurevuls_get_groupset_servers which focus on specific group members or groupsets.

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 for listing servers with pagination and filtering, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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