robot_list_servers

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

In the absence of annotations, the description effectively discloses key behavioral traits: read-only nature, no cost, and default compact output. This goes beyond just stating the purpose.

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: one sentence for purpose and one sentence for key traits. Every word contributes value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 has three parameters (including a nested object) and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain the compact vs verbose format, nor how to use the id or query parameters effectively. Adequate but leaves gaps.

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 descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds 'Compact by default' which clarifies the verbose parameter's behavior, providing marginal added value over the schema alone.

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 'List dedicated servers.' It specifies the verb (list) and the resource (dedicated servers), distinguishing it from sibling tools like robot_list_subnets or cloud_list_servers.

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 mentions 'Read only, free' implying safe usage, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. Guidance is minimal.

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