list_vm_classes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds: no pagination, one-call full list, and the resource reservation difference between class prefixes. This enriches the behavioral model beyond what annotations provide.

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 compact (~10 lines) with a logical flow: tool purpose, return format, usage notes, and parameter details. Every sentence contributes value, with no redundant or vague statements.

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 tool's simplicity (1 optional param, read-only output with schema), the description is fully adequate. It covers what the tool returns, how to use it, and its role in the workflow (prerequisite for create_tkc_cluster). No gaps remain.

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 single parameter 'target' has 0% schema description coverage, but the description provides a full explanation: 'Name of a vCenter entry in ~/.vmware-vks/config.yaml. Omit to use the default target defined in that file.' This gives clear semantics and usage direction.

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 starts with '[READ] List VM classes available for sizing TKC cluster nodes,' which clearly states the verb (list) and resource (VM classes). It specifies the return fields (id, cpu_count, memory_mb, gpu_count) and distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning it is a precursor to create_tkc_cluster.

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 states 'Read-only, no side effects' and advises 'Call this before create_tkc_cluster and pass the chosen id as its vm_class argument.' It also contrasts 'guaranteed-*' vs 'best-effort-*' classes, providing actionable guidance on when to use each.

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