List Regions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description does not need to repeat safety traits. It adds the 'available capacity' detail, but leaves ambiguity about whether that filters regions or describes the returned field.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. The qualifier 'with available capacity' earns its place by adding useful scoping information.

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 no-parameter, read-only list operation, the description plus annotations are sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. A minor gap is the lack of detail about the exact response shape or the meaning of 'available capacity'.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema already covers everything. The description's 'available capacity' phrase hints at return-value semantics rather than parameters, and no further compensation is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), a concrete resource ('Krova Cloud regions'), and a useful qualifier ('with available capacity'). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools such as list_cubes, list_images, and list_domains.

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 gives clear context that this is the region-listing operation. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but no sibling tool covers regions, so selection is unambiguous.

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