List Cubes

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds context that the operation lists all arrays of data within a cloud space, but does not disclose potential pagination, performance, or authentication nuances. This is adequate but not enriched beyond annotations.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with zero filler or redundancy. Every word earns its place, and the clarifying parenthetical is helpful without bloating the text.

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 read-only list tool with one optional parameter, the description is nearly complete. It could mention what fields are returned or note the array shape since there is no output schema, but the core behavior and scope are clear enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 parameter's description fully explains that it is optional when KROVA_SPACE_ID is set. The main description adds no parameter detail, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('Cubes' with the clarifying parenthetical 'Firecracker microVMs'), and a clear scope ('in a Krova Cloud Space'). The word 'all' inherently distinguishes it from sibling get_cube, which targets a single Cube.

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 the tool is for listing the full set of Cubes, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus get_cube or when not to use it. There are no exclusions or named alternatives, so usage context is only inferred.

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