List reservable items

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and closed-world scope, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the domain fact that these items are the ones reservations reference; no pagination, count, or return behavior beyond the (present) output 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?

A single efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No wasted words, though the terse parenthetical is the only elaboration offered.

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 rich annotations, a fully described 3-param schema, and an output schema, the definition covers most needs. The gap is usage guidance — nothing tells the agent when this listing is the right choice over its reservation/asset siblings.

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% and two of three params are enums with documented meanings, so the schema carries the burden. The description adds nothing about range/fields/format, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('items flagged as reservable'), and the parenthetical clarifies these are the catalogue items that reservations point at. This distinguishes it from glpi_list_reservations, though it doesn't name that sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternative. An agent cannot tell from the text whether to reach for this vs glpi_list_reservations or glpi_list_assets when looking for reservable things.

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