stack_ps

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/destructiveHint annotations, the description discloses that output is parsed from CLI `--format '{{json .}}'`, that a RuntimeError is raised on CLI failure, and that results include error details. This adds meaningful behavioral context not available from annotations.

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 well-structured with a one-sentence summary, an args section, and a returns section. Every sentence adds value, and the text is compact without being overly verbose.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the return type (list of dicts with fields), all parameter meanings, error behavior, and the swarm manager prerequisite. This makes it self-sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage, the description provides detailed semantics for all three parameters: `name` identifies the stack, `no_trunc` controls truncation, and `filters` includes an example and explains list-value behavior. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 the tasks of a stack' with a clear verb and resource, and explicitly contrasts with `service_ps` to clarify scope. It differentiates itself as the task-level view across every service.

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 explicitly names `service_ps` as an alternative for one-service coverage, and notes the swarm manager requirement. This gives clear context for when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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