host_list

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the '[READ]' tag in the description is consistent with that. The description adds the set of fields returned, which is useful, but says nothing about pagination, result limits, or behavior when the pool filter matches nothing. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but adds only modest extra context.

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-loaded with the read tag and purpose, followed by a short args block. No filler sentences and no repetition, though the field list in the opening line duplicates information the agent could infer from a call result.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately enumerates the returned fields, and it documents both parameters. The main remaining gap is lack of guidance on result volume or filtering behavior, but for a simple read-only list tool this is close to complete.

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 for both parameters, and it does: 'pool' is identified as an optional pool uuid filter and 'target' as the Xen Orchestra target name from config, with the instruction to omit it for the default. That is meaningfully more than the bare, undescribed schema properties.

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 ('List hosts') and goes further by naming the returned fields (version, state, memory usage, resident VM count). The 'List' framing distinguishes it from the sibling host_get, though it doesn't call that distinction out explicitly.

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 guidance, no exclusions, and no reference to alternatives such as host_get for a single host. The only usage-adjacent text is the 'target' parameter note, which is parameter guidance rather than tool selection guidance.

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