gcp_compute_instances

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

The label '[SAFE]' hints at non-destructive behavior, but without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose what happens when the optional 'zone' parameter is omitted (e.g., lists across all zones) or any other behavioral traits like throttling or output size.

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 with one sentence. While it is not wasteful, it may be too short to convey necessary details. Still, it is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 lack of output schema and only one optional parameter, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, pagination, or behavior without the zone parameter. More context is needed for a minimal viable description.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the 'zone' parameter at all. It adds no meaning beyond the raw schema, failing to explain how the parameter affects results or common usage.

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 GCE instances', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming GCE (Google Compute Engine) explicitly, supporting cross-cloud differentiation. However, it lacks any additional context about scope or 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'aws_ec2_instances' or 'azure_vm_list'. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or usage tips.

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