List Nitrado services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It clearly describes a read-only listing operation and the fields returned, but it does not go beyond that. It lacks explicit statements about side effects (though 'list' implies none), authentication requirements, or any caveats. This is adequate 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource ('List every service'), and provides essential context without any filler. Every word earns its place.

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 0 parameters and an output schema present, the description fully covers what the tool does. It explains the scope ('every service on the Nitrado account') and the purpose, making it complete for this simple list operation.

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 zero parameters, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description correctly omits parameter details since there are none to explain. No further elaboration is needed.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List every service on the Nitrado account' and specifies the returned fields (id, game, status, expiry). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on the account-level listing, not on specific Project Zomboid 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 a clear and explicit when-to-use instruction: 'Call this when you don't yet know the service_id... or when the user asks what they have hosted.' However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, though the context is clear enough.

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