list_servers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic function and return type, without disclosing behavioral traits such as error handling, pagination, authentication requirements, or what happens when no servers are accessible.

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 short but includes a redundant second sentence that restates the return type. It could be more efficiently written by combining both sentences into one, e.g., 'Returns a list of Redfish Servers that can be accessed.'

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 list tool with no parameters and an existing output schema, the description is minimally acceptable. However, it lacks context on what 'can be accessed' means, potential error conditions, or how the list is sorted. Additional details would enhance completeness.

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?

The tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information. It correctly implies no input is required, so the baseline score of 4 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 the tool's action: 'List all Redfish Servers that can be accessed.' It specifies the resource (Redfish Servers) and the action (list all), which distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'get_resource_data' that likely retrieves data for a specific server.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context for invocation.

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