opnsense_list_services

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context about covering core and plugin services, pagination fields, and the response format, without contradicting the annotations.

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 well-structured with Args, Returns, and Examples sections. Each sentence contributes necessary information, and the content is front-loaded with the core purpose. It is detailed but not verbose, with no wasted words.

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 list tool with an output schema, the description explains pagination fields (total, has_more, next_offset) and provides concrete query examples. It also clarifies the distinction between markdown and JSON output, making it complete for the intended use case.

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 Args section mirrors the schema's parameter descriptions, but adds practical guidance, especially for response_format: 'json returns every field the API provided and is better when chaining values into another call.' The examples map intents to parameter values, which adds meaning beyond the raw 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 opens with 'List services registered with OPNsense and whether each one is running,' which clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly directing the user to opnsense_control_service for restart operations.

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 explicit usage context: 'Use this to get the exact service id before calling opnsense_control_service' and includes examples with 'Use when' and 'Don't use when', naming the alternative tool opnsense_control_service. This fully satisfies the when/when-not/alternatives criteria.

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