list_services

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description stays consistent with that by describing a read-only listing operation. It adds the useful context that the result is optionally filtered by project, but it does not disclose pagination, ordering, permission needs, or error behavior. With the annotation covering the safety profile, 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 compact, with the core purpose front-loaded in the first sentence and a minimal Args block for the parameter. No wasted words or redundant elaboration.

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 simple list operation with one optional parameter, readOnlyHint=true, and an output schema, the description gives enough to call the tool correctly: what it lists and how to filter. It does not discuss pagination or ordering, but these are not critical for such a straightforward read-only endpoint.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does: 'project_id: Optional project ID to filter services' clearly explains the parameter's purpose, which is far more informative than the schema's bare title and default value. The description fully covers the only parameter.

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 in EasyPanel'), and it mentions the optional project filter. This differentiates it from the sibling get_service, which targets a single service, without needing to open the schema.

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 when to use the tool: whenever you need the full list of services, optionally scoped by project. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with get_service or mention when the filter should be used versus when it should be omitted, so usage guidance is only implied, not explicit.

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