ha_resource_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states it is a read operation and returns empty if HA not configured, which is helpful. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or what 'resources' exactly includes beyond VMs/CTs.

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, using two sentences to convey purpose, scope, and a key behavioral note. The '[READ]' prefix front-loads the action type. No unnecessary words.

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 simple nature of the tool (list, one optional param, no output schema), the description covers the basics. However, it lacks information about return format, pagination, error handling, or what happens if target is omitted. It is minimally complete but could be more informative.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the only parameter 'target' has no schema description. The description adds 'Proxmox target name from config', which clarifies the source of the parameter, adding value beyond the raw 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 it lists HA-managed resources (VMs/CTs) and explicitly marks it as a read operation with '[READ]'. It distinguishes from siblings like ha_status (status) and vm_list (all VMs) by focusing on HA-managed resources.

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 mentions that the result is empty when HA is not configured, which implies when to use, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like ha_status or vm_list. There is no guidance on prerequisites or when not to use.

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