list_datastores

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that datastores are provisioning-relevant; it says nothing about filtering, pagination, or result scope, though an output schema exists to carry return details.

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 compact sentence with the action and scope front-loaded and no filler. Slightly terse given it omits any routing to related list tools.

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 two-parameter read tool with 100% schema coverage and an output schema covering returns, the description is sufficient to call it correctly. It only lacks sibling differentiation against list_datastore_clusters.

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 both parameters document their own purpose plus pointer tools (list_virtual_centers, list_hosts_or_clusters). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ("List") and resource ("datastores") with scope ("available in vCenter") and a use context ("for desktop pool or farm provisioning"). It does not distinguish itself from the closely named sibling list_datastore_clusters, which an agent would need to choose between.

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 phrase "for desktop pool or farm provisioning" implies when the result is useful, but there is no explicit when-to-use, prerequisite, or alternative (e.g., list_datastore_clusters) guidance. Usage is inferable, not stated.

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