remnawave_hosts_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It indicates the tool is read-only, which is good. However, it fails to explain why parameters like 'confirmToken' and 'mutationApproved' exist, which could confuse an agent. No details about pagination, sorting, or side effects are given.

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 extremely brief (5 words) and lacks structure. While brevity can be a virtue, here it omits critical information, making it under-specified rather than concise. Important details about parameters and usage are missing.

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 presence of 4 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the return format, any prerequisites, or how the parameters affect the listing. The agent cannot safely use this tool based solely on the description.

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 0% description coverage and 4 parameters with unclear roles (payload, confirmToken, responseMode, mutationApproved). The description adds no semantic information about these parameters, leaving the agent without any guidance on how to use them correctly.

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 it is a list operation ('hosts.list') and specifies it is a read operation. This sufficiently distinguishes it from write operations like create or update. However, it does not elaborate on what exactly is listed (all hosts, filtered?) or differentiate from other list tools like 'list_tags'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as 'remnawave_hosts_get' (single host) or 'remnawave_hosts_list_tags'. There are no explicit context cues, alternative recommendations, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate use case.

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