pve_cluster_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the scope of the summary (nodes, quorum, guest states), but says nothing about whether values are aggregated live, cached, or how stale they may be — relevant for a health check whose whole value is freshness.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and the three things returned all appear immediately. Nothing is repeated from the annotations or schema.

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 an output schema present, the description needn't explain return structure, and with no parameters there are no argument semantics to cover. Only the freshness/aggregation behavior of the health data is left unaddressed, a minor gap for an otherwise self-contained read-only overview tool.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate and no schema burden to compensate for. The description correctly implies the call is argument-free, matching the empty schema.

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 names a specific verb ("Summarise") and resource ("cluster health") and enumerates the payload: nodes, quorum, and guest counts by state. It is unambiguous what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling list tools like pve_list_nodes or pve_list_vms.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no sibling is named as an alternative. Usage is only implied by the word "Summarise" versus the granular list/get siblings, leaving the agent to infer that this is the high-level overview entry point.

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