list-cpu-types

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the behavioral trait that it returns a 501 on the v1 API, which is beyond annotations. This is valuable context for the agent.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, the second adds a critical version constraint. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, a mention of return format would be helpful but not essential. The tool is simple, and parameters describe pagination. The description is complete enough for a list tool with name and annotations providing implicit understanding.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not mention parameters; all parameter meaning is in the schema. No additional value added, but schema does the work, so score 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 states 'List available CPU flavor types for CPU pods/endpoints' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like 'get-cpu-type' and 'list-gpu-types' by focusing on CPU types. It also notes v2-only behavior.

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 v2-only and that v1 returns a 501, which provides usage context. However, it does not explicitly compare to siblings like 'get-cpu-type' for single items or 'list-gpu-types' for GPU types, nor provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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