list_node_services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It lacks information about permissions, behavior (e.g., whether services are running or stopped), or response format. The minimal description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic listing action.

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 short (two sentences) but includes an 'Args' section that duplicates schema information. It could be more concise by removing redundancy. It is not overly verbose, but some structure could be improved.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists) and the context signals, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral hints, which limits completeness for an agent deciding among many sibling tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description only repeats 'The node name' for the node parameter, adding no semantic value beyond the schema. The parameter meaning is obvious from its name, but the description fails to provide useful context or constraints.

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 states 'List all system services on a node (pve, ssh, cron, etc.)', clearly indicating the verb and resource with examples. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools that target VMs, containers, or other node operations.

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 like manage_node_service or other listing tools. There are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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