list_datastore_clusters

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. The verb 'List' communicates a read-only intent, and the phrase 'available on a host or cluster' defines the data scope. It could add prerequisite or permission details, but for a simple list operation the description is adequate.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the purpose, the second explains downstream integration without repetition. Every sentence earns its place and there is no wasted 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 2-parameter read-only listing tool with an output schema and full schema parameter descriptions, the description covers the relevant context: what it lists, the object type, and how the result is used. Slightly more detail about prerequisites or scope limitations could be added, but nothing critical is missing.

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% and both parameters already have descriptions pointing to their source tools (list_virtual_centers and list_hosts_or_clusters). The tool description adds context about the output rather than deepening the meaning of the parameters themselves, so it stays at the high-coverage baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('datastore clusters / Storage DRS pods'), and clarifies the scope ('available on a host or cluster'). It naturally distinguishes itself from siblings like list_datastores by naming the exact resource type.

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?

It explicitly explains why one would call this tool: to obtain a datastore_cluster_id for use in create_desktop_pool or create_rdsh_farm under Storage DRS. It does not name excluded alternatives such as list_datastores, but the intended use case is clearly communicated.

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