timeweb_list_os

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'for server creation' adds context, but the description does not disclose details such as output format, pagination, or any potential side effects. It is adequate for a simple list tool but lacks depth.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary purpose and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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, the description covers the core purpose effectively. The schema handles parameter details. However, the description does not explicitly mention the 'format' option or describe the return structure, which would be helpful but is not critical given the schema and low complexity.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single 'format' parameter, so the schema already documents the parameter's meaning and enum values. The description does not mention this parameter or add any additional semantic information beyond what the schema provides, thus meeting the baseline of 3.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('available operating system images') with a clear context ('for server creation'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool timeweb_list_images by specifying 'operating system', which implies a focus on OS images rather than general images.

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 when listing OS images needed for server creation, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like timeweb_list_images. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer.

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