cluster_resources

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. The verb 'Fetch' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly confirm non-mutation, output format, or any access requirements. It provides basic behavioral context but could be more explicit.

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 a single, compact sentence that front-loads the main action and scope, then clarifies the parameter. Every word contributes value with no redundancy.

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 the simplicity of the tool (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential scope and filtering options. It is sufficient for a basic list tool, though it could mention return composition or any special handling of null filter, but that is not critical here.

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 schema property 'type_filter' has no description and no enum, but the description compensates by listing valid filter values (node, qemu, lxc, storage) and stating that the filter is optional. This adds meaningful meaning beyond the structural 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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' with the resource 'resource list' and clearly scopes it to 'across the Proxmox cluster'. It distinguishes from siblings like list_vms or list_storage by emphasizing the cluster-wide aggregation and optional type filtering.

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 clearly implies use for cluster-wide resource enumeration with optional filtering, providing context for when to use this tool versus more specific list tools. However, it does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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