MCP cldkctl Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description fails to indicate whether this is a read operation (likely, given 'detail'), a mutation, or something else. It doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, or what the response contains. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is completely inadequate.

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 the description is brief (one sentence), it's under-specified rather than concise. The single sentence 'Call the cldkctl_vm_detail endpoint' wastes its opportunity to convey purpose or usage. It's front-loaded with no meaningful content, making it inefficient despite its short length.

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?

The description is severely incomplete for a tool with no annotations and no output schema. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., VM configuration, status, metrics), its behavioral characteristics, or how it differs from sibling tools. Given the complexity implied by the server's many tools, this minimal description leaves critical gaps for an agent to understand and use the tool 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?

The schema description coverage is 100% with one parameter (vm_id) clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter information beyond what's already in the schema. According to the scoring rules, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info 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_detail endpoint' is a tautology that restates the tool name without explaining what it actually does. It mentions an endpoint but doesn't specify the action (e.g., retrieve details, view information) or what resource it operates on beyond the vague 'vm_detail' reference. While the name suggests it's about VM details, the description adds no meaningful clarification.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the sibling tools include cldkctl_get_vm, cldkctl_vm_list, and various VM management tools (create, delete, reboot), there's no indication whether this tool is for detailed metadata, status monitoring, or another purpose. The agent receives no usage context or exclusions.

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