pve_list_ha_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'List HA groups' implies a read-only operation but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, output format, pagination, or whether it lists all groups or requires filtering. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this minimal description leaves critical behavior unspecified.

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 extremely concise ('List HA groups') but under-specified rather than efficiently informative. While it avoids waste, it fails to provide necessary context that would help an agent use the tool effectively. Conciseness without substance doesn't earn high marks.

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 tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what HA groups are, what data is returned, or how this fits into the broader HA management context. For a list operation in a complex system like Proxmox VE, more context is needed despite the minimal structured data.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage (empty schema). The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it correctly doesn't mention any. With no parameters, the baseline is 4, as the description doesn't add parameter semantics but doesn't need to compensate for gaps.

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 'List HA groups' is a tautology that restates the tool name 'pve_list_ha_groups' without adding meaningful context. It specifies the verb 'List' and resource 'HA groups' but lacks specificity about what HA groups are or what information is listed. It doesn't distinguish from sibling list tools like 'pve_list_ha_resources' or 'pve_list_groups'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or comparison to sibling tools like 'pve_get_ha_group' (for individual groups) or 'pve_ha_status' (for overall HA status). The agent receives no usage instructions.

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