list_all_clusters

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds content details (host count, DRS/HA, resource totals) and clarifies that 'target' defaults to a configured default. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., permission requirements) are disclosed, but the description does not contradict annotations.

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 extremely concise with a clear one-line summary followed by parameter details in bullet form. No superfluous text, and the structure front-loads the purpose.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns (host count, DRS/HA, resource totals). It does not discuss pagination or edge cases, but for a simple list tool with two optional parameters, this is sufficient.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden. It explains 'target' as an optional vCenter/ESXi name with a default, and 'limit' as a maximum number of clusters (None for all). This provides meaningful guidance beyond the bare schema.

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 that the tool lists clusters with host count, DRS/HA status, and resource totals. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list datastores, hosts, or VMs. The '[READ]' prefix further clarifies the operation type.

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 for retrieving cluster information but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_all_datastores or list_esxi_hosts. No exclusion criteria or selection guidance is provided.

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