List Nacos namespaces

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds cross-version compatibility and optional filtering, but does not describe return shape, pagination, or error behavior. This is acceptable for a simple read-only list operation but not rich.

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 well-structured sentence delivers the core purpose, the optional parameter behavior, and version compatibility without any wasted words. Key information is front-loaded.

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 simple read-only listing tool with one optional parameter, the combination of description, schema, and annotations fully supports correct selection and invocation. No critical information about when or how to call the tool is missing.

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 the namespaceId parameter already includes detail about omitting it and default namespace differences across versions. The description's mention of optional filtering reinforces the schema without adding significant new meaning.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('namespaces (tenants) available on the Nacos server'), and an optional filtering behavior ('optionally filtered to a single namespace ID'). It is easily distinguished from sibling tools that deal with server info or configs.

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 makes it obvious when to use the tool: when namespace/tenant information is needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource-specific phrasing and sibling context make mis-selection unlikely. It also notes cross-version compatibility, which adds useful context.

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