list_servers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the basic action, omitting details about pagination (implied by optional page and perPage), status filtering, error handling, or response format. The agent cannot infer critical behavioral traits.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. No redundant or unnecessary words, making it efficient for quick comprehension.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on pagination, filtering, response structure, and usage context. The agent would need to guess or experiment to 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 has 0% coverage (no property descriptions). The tool description only clarifies that appUuid identifies the app, adding minimal meaning. The optional parameters page, status, and perPage are not explained, leaving the agent without guidance on their use or effects.

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 verb 'list', the resource 'media servers (transcoders)', and the scope 'for a given app UUID'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_apps, list_channels, and get_server_info.

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. The description does not mention use cases, exclusions, or when not to use it. With siblings like get_server_info and check_health_summary, explicit differentiation would be helpful.

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