services_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that there are no side effects, nor does it disclose any permission requirements or pagination/ordering behavior. The examples do add useful context about what 'managed services' includes.

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 focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then supplements with helpful examples. Every word earns its place; there is no redundant phrasing or boilerplate.

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?

For a zero-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description is largely sufficient: it names the resource and gives examples. It could be more explicit about whether it returns all managed services or only a subset, and how it relates to system_services_overview, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 for a parameter-free tool applies, and no additional parameter information is needed.

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 a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('managed services'), with concrete examples such as httpd, exim, dovecot, and named. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like services_get, services_start, and services_stop, which operate on individual services rather than listing them.

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 implies the tool is used when an agent needs to enumerate managed services, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or which alternative to prefer. For example, it does not clarify how it differs from system_services_overview or when services_get would be more appropriate.

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