instances_list_servers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only list operation but omits details such as pagination behavior, data freshness, or potential rate limits. This leaves the AI agent underinformed about side effects and constraints.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words. It conveys the core purpose efficiently, earning its place without fluff.

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 tool is a simple list operation with filters. While the description could mention response format or pagination, the presence of an output schema and the tool's simplicity make the description largely sufficient. Minor gap in not noting pagination behavior.

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% for all 3 parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions 'in a zone' which overlaps with the zone parameter description. Therefore, no extra value is provided.

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 lists compute instances (servers) in a zone, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like baremetal_list_servers (different infrastructure type) and instances_create_server (different action).

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 implies usage for listing compute instances but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like baremetal_list_servers or instances_list_images. No exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

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