cluster_resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description's '[READ]' tag is largely redundant with that. It adds the useful 'single-call cluster-wide' framing, but says nothing about return shape, pagination, or auth needs, leaving the added value modest.

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?

Front-loads the '[READ]' tag and purpose, then the routing guidance, then a compact Args block. Every line earns its place; only minor redundancy in restating the read-only nature keeps it from being maximally tight.

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 read-only inventory tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what is returned (aggregate VMs, nodes, storage) and how to scope it. It could say more about the response fields, but nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 parameter meaning, and it does: it supplies the accepted filter values ('vm', 'node', 'storage') that the schema omits and explains 'target' as the Proxmox target name from config. This meaningfully compensates for the empty schema descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: an aggregate cluster-wide inventory of VMs, nodes, and storage. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning vm_get and node_status as the drill-down tools, so an agent can route correctly without opening either schema.

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?

Gives clear usage context ('enumerate everything before drilling into vm_get / node_status') and names the alternatives it precedes. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use clause, but the routing intent is unambiguous.

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