list_machines

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as permissions required, side effects (e.g., read-only vs. mutating), pagination, filtering behavior, or error conditions. The fields listed are not enough to inform an agent about the tool's safety or limits.

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 short sentence, which is efficient and avoids verbosity. However, it could be slightly expanded to include parameter or usage details without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the moderate complexity (2 optional params, many siblings), the description is insufficient. It lacks usage guidelines, parameter semantics, and behavioral context. Even though there is an output schema (not shown), the description should provide more than just the output fields.

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 input schema has two optional parameters ('cluster' and 'label_selector') with no descriptions, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not explain what these parameters do or how they affect the results, leaving the agent without guidance on how to use them.

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 explicitly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'Machines', and specifies the fields returned (phase, node ref, provider ID, age). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like 'list_machine_sets' or 'list_machine_config_pools' by focusing on machines themselves.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the extensive list of sibling tools for listing different resources, the description should indicate typical use cases or conditions, but it does not.

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