list_vm_classes

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

Discloses return envelope details, that one call returns all results with truncated always false, and the resource reservation semantics of class names. This goes well beyond the annotations, which only state read-only/idempotent hints.

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 well-structured with a clear [READ] prefix, purpose, return details, usage guidance, and args section. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or 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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, this description covers purpose, return shape, usage prerequisites, and parameter semantics. It is fully self-contained and leaves no important gaps.

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?

Describes the only parameter 'target' as a vCenter from config.yaml and explains how to omit it for default. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema, which only lists a nullable string with a default.

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 it lists VM classes for sizing TKC cluster nodes, with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning the use case and the return envelope structure, making it clear what the tool does.

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?

Explicitly says to call this before create_tkc_cluster and pass the id as vm_class, and contrasts guaranteed vs. best-effort classes. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and even names a sibling tool.

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