redis_list_clusters

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing behavior such as pagination, rate limits, authorization needs, or that it is read-only. Missing critical transparency for safe use.

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?

Single sentence, no filler, front-loaded with the key action and resource. Extremely concise and efficient.

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 simplicity of the tool (list operation), high schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description is largely adequate. It could mention optional filtering but is complete enough for a straightforward list tool.

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%, and the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Each parameter is already well-described in the schema, so the description provides no extra value.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'List', resource 'Managed Redis clusters', and scope 'in a zone'. It is specific and distinguishes from siblings like redis_get_cluster (single cluster) and redis_list_node_types (different resource).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies usage for listing clusters, but does not mention when to prefer it over redis_get_cluster for details or how filtering works. Minimal usage context.

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