node_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations: it requires a swarm manager and explains the return shape (a list of full node documents with Spec, Status, and ManagerStatus where applicable).

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 compact and well structured: a one-line purpose, a prerequisite, a sibling pointer, and clearly labeled Args/Returns. Every sentence adds information; there is no filler or repetition of the schema.

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 read-only list operation with a single optional filter parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: manager requirement, filterable attributes, and return shape. It is not exhaustive about filter syntax or error conditions, but it is sufficiently complete for correct invocation.

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 only says filters is an object, with 0% description coverage. The description compensates by explaining that filters accepts id, name, membership, and role. It does not specify exact formats or values, but it gives enough semantic grounding to use the parameter sensibly.

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 opens with the explicit, specific action 'List swarm nodes' and frames it as the fleet-level view. It also distinguishes itself from node_inspect, stating that node_inspect is for drilling into one node, making the purpose clear relative to siblings.

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 gives a concrete prerequisite ('Must run against a swarm manager') and an explicit routing rule: use this for the fleet view, use node_inspect to drill into one node. This is exactly the kind of when-to-use guidance an agent needs.

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