list_connected_peers

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

With no annotations, the description conveys the basic read-only behavior of listing connected peers, but lacks details about potential side effects, rate limits, or authorization needs. It is adequate but not exceptionally transparent.

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 sentence of 10 words, front-loaded with the verb 'List'. It is efficient and contains no unnecessary 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?

Given low complexity (no parameters, no destructive actions) and the presence of an output schema, the description is sufficient for understanding the tool's purpose. It could optionally mention the output structure, but not required.

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 fully documents the input. Under the guideline '0 params = baseline 4', the description does not need to add parameter semantics.

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 the action 'List' and the specific resource 'all peers currently connected to this node over the P2P network'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'discover_agents' and 'get_agent_card' which focus on different aspects.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no conditions or exclusions, and no mention of prerequisites. The usage context is purely implied.

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