node_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds useful context: it is a fleet view, returns full node documents with specific fields, and requires a swarm manager. No contradiction with annotations. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but with strong annotations and return details, this is well-covered.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core action 'List swarm nodes'. The subsequent sentences add essential context, usage notes, and return format, all without redundancy. The args/returns structure is efficiently included without breaking flow.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains the return format (list of full node documents with specific fields), the runtime requirement (swarm manager), and provides pointers to alternatives for deeper inspection. No additional detail is needed.

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 input schema merely defines 'filters' as an object with no description, but the description compensates by explicitly listing 'Filter by attributes (id, name, membership, role)'. This gives the agent concrete guidance on what to pass for the parameter, which is essential given 0% schema coverage.

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 'List swarm nodes' with a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes itself from siblings by noting 'drill into one node with node_inspect, or read the docker://nodes resource for a computed summary', making it explicit that this tool is for the fleet-level view.

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 strong usage guidance: 'Must run against a swarm manager' sets the prerequisite, and it explicitly names alternatives (node_inspect for single node, docker://nodes for summary), helping the agent decide when to choose this tool over others.

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