List services

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: filters are ANDed, name matches as substring, and the underlying API endpoint is GET /services. It does not mention pagination or response format, but the safety profile is fully covered by annotations, so this is a strong score.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence serves a distinct role: purpose, filter behavior, API call, and usage differentiation. No wasted words or redundant content.

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 14 parameters, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers the essential context: filter semantics, permission scoping, and when to prefer an alternative tool. It does not explicitly mention pagination behavior (though schema includes limit/cursor with links), and the phrase 'returns all services' could be misread given pagination, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a list operation.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description enriches parameter understanding by stating that filters are ANDed and that name matches as a substring rather than exactly, which is not evident from individual parameter descriptions. This adds semantic value beyond the schema.

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 tool lists services, with explicit scope: 'List services matching the provided filters' and 'If no filters are provided, returns all services you have permissions to view.' It distinguishes from sibling render_find_service by noting that tool resolves a single service with approximate names, while this tool is for enumeration/filtering in bulk.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use vs alternative: 'When the user named one service, render_find_service resolves it in a single call and handles approximate names; reach for this tool to enumerate or filter in bulk.' Also clarifies default behavior with no filters and the permission scope of results.

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