MCP cldkctl Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It fails to do so: it doesn't mention that this is a creation/mutation operation, potential side effects (e.g., resource allocation, billing implications), authentication requirements, error conditions, or rate limits. The description is completely inadequate for a tool that likely creates infrastructure resources.

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?

While concise with a single sentence, the description is under-specified and fails to convey essential information. Conciseness should not come at the cost of clarity; this description is too brief to be helpful, wasting its opportunity to inform. It lacks structure and front-loading of key details.

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 complexity of VM creation (a mutation with 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain the tool's behavior, output, error handling, or integration with sibling tools. For a critical operation like VM provisioning, this description leaves the agent with insufficient context to use it 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%, with clear parameter descriptions in the schema (e.g., 'Project ID', 'VM name'). The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides. According to guidelines, with high schema coverage (>80%), the baseline score is 3 when no param info is in the description, which applies here.

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 'Call the cldkctl_vm_create endpoint' is a tautology that restates the tool name without explaining what it does. While the name suggests VM creation, the description fails to specify the action (create), resource (virtual machine), or distinguish it from sibling VM tools like cldkctl_create_vm or cldkctl_create_vm_yaml. It provides no meaningful purpose statement beyond the obvious.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools for VM operations (e.g., cldkctl_create_vm, cldkctl_create_vm_yaml, cldkctl_vm_detail), but the description gives no indication of prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or distinctions between them. It lacks any usage instructions.

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