get_systemd_units

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

Even without annotations, the description discloses that the tool is read-only via systemctl, which is a safe operation, and that it is fatal if systemctl is missing or fails. This gives crucial behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, then parameter details, then usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema. The description covers purpose, usage, behavioral traits, and parameter semantics comprehensively, leaving no critical gaps.

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 already documents the state parameter with full coverage, but the description adds meaning by specifying that it filters by exact match on the Active column, clarifying the matching semantics beyond the schema's simple listing of allowed values.

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 all systemd units and their states, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from get_service_status for one unit's details.

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?

Explicitly states the tool is for a full service inventory and directs to get_service_status for single-unit details. It also explains the state parameter filters by exact match, providing clear context.

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