helm_list_services

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

The description correctly implies a read operation but lacks details on authorization requirements, performance implications, or any side effects. Without annotations, more behavioral context would be beneficial, but for a simple list tool this is adequate.

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, clear sentence with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the tool's 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?

For a parameterless list tool with an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the core functionality. It specifies what is listed and the key fields, leaving details to the output schema.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by specifying the fields returned (status, pid, metrics), which is valuable beyond 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 clearly states the action 'List' and the resource 'all services', and specifies the included information (status, pid, metrics). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like helm_get_service (single service) and helm_service_logs (logs only).

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 usage guidelines or when-not-to-use information is provided. The description does not mention alternatives or contexts where this tool is preferred over siblings like helm_service_metrics or helm_get_service.

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