agileconfig_list_services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description takes full burden. It discloses that it returns health status, IP, and port for all registered services, which is sufficient for a read-only list operation. However, it does not mention any potential side effects or limitations like pagination.

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 sentence that directly states what the tool does and what information it provides. It is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

The description provides essential information about the output (health status, IP, port) but uses 'etc.' which is vague. Given no output schema, more specific field names would improve completeness. However, for a list tool, it is adequate.

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 no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-specific details, which is appropriate. Baseline score of 4 is given as the description covers the tool's function without needing parameter info.

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 tool retrieves all registered services and lists included fields like health status, IP, and port. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_nodes and list_apps by specifying 'services'.

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 this tool is for listing services, but no explicit guidance is given on when to use it versus alternatives or any prerequisites. For a simple listing tool without parameters, this is acceptable but lacks clarity.

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