get_hosts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the concrete HTTP method/path (a read of the hosts collection), but says nothing about pagination, filtering, or the shape/size of results. With annotations carrying the burden, this is an adequate but thin addition.

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?

Two short lines, zero padding, purpose front-loaded. It is not bloated, but it is also nearly as terse as a bare identifier, so it earns efficiency points without adding explanatory substance.

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-param, read-only listing endpoint with no output schema, the definition is minimally viable: an agent knows it returns hosts, but not whether the list is paginated, filtered, or complete, nor what a 'host' contains. Acceptable, but with visible 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to compensate for. Baseline for a no-parameter tool applies; no parameter meaning is missing because none exist.

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 gives a specific verb+resource (get hosts) and reinforces it with the actual endpoint GET /api/hosts/, so an agent can tell this is a collection-listing read. It does not differentiate from nearby siblings such as get_hosts_tags or the node/host stat tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use statement, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to any alternative tool for host-related data. The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the name and the sibling list.

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