List the hosts of a private fleet

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds genuinely useful behavior: status filtering semantics ('only ACTIVE hosts accept deployments') and the failure mode for orgs without fleets. It stops short of describing pagination or the shape/ordering of the returned host list, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by the operational constraint, the downstream call, and the error case. Nothing is repeated and every sentence carries information an agent needs.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description names the returned fields (status, IP, location), the key filtering concept, the hand-off to edgegap_deploy, and the failure condition. For a single-parameter read tool this is sufficient to call it correctly.

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 is only one parameter (fleet_name) and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema already saying it is 'the private fleet name, as shown in the dashboard.' The description refers to 'one of the organization's private fleets' but adds no format, naming convention, or lookup guidance beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (hosts of a private fleet) and immediately clarifies what a private fleet is ('dedicated machines Edgegap manages for you'), plus the fields returned (status, IP, location). No sibling tool covers fleet hosts, so there is no ambiguity to resolve.

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?

Explicitly says only ACTIVE hosts accept deployments, tells the agent to pass host_id values to edgegap_deploy as private_host_ids, and warns that organizations without private fleets get an API error. That is when-to-use, what-to-do-next, and a when-not condition all in one paragraph.

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