stack_ps

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, which the description aligns with. The description adds value by disclosing the return format (list of dicts with specific fields) and the parsing mechanism, though some behaviors like error handling are omitted.

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 with a clear intro and structured args/returns sections. Minor formatting overhead (backticks) exists, but is not excessive.

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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a thorough overview of purpose, parameters, and return structure. It covers the parsing detail and field names, though could mention stack existence prerequisites.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description's 'args' section explains each parameter's meaning and special behavior (e.g., filters as a list value repeats), adding significant semantic value beyond the schema's basic type definitions.

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 verb 'list' and the resource 'tasks of a stack', and distinguishes it from siblings like 'stack_services' and 'compose_ps' by focusing on individual tasks with parsed JSON output.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites or contextual cues are provided, leaving the agent without decision support.

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