list_downtimes

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. 'Active and scheduled' provides useful scope by indicating that past/ended downtimes are excluded, and the tool is evidently read-only. However, it does not mention return format, pagination behavior, or any permissions needed, though these may be less critical for a list operation.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, containing no unnecessary filler. It is concise and easily scannable.

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 tool's simplicity, the schema's thorough parameter documentation, and the lack of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could be improved by mentioning that the result is a paginated list, but the pagination parameters in the schema imply this, so the description is adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 100% coverage, with descriptions for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, such as how the 'is_active' filter relates to the 'active and scheduled' phrasing, but this is already clear from the 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'), the resource ('downtimes'), and the scope ('active and scheduled') within the Centreon platform. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_downtime_host and add_downtime_service, which create downtimes, and list_acknowledgements, which lists a different resource.

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 usage for viewing downtimes, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or provide exclusions. There is no mention of when to use list_downtimes versus list_events or list_acknowledgements, though the resource name makes the basic use case clear.

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