list_hosts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the description mentions filtering and pagination, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is safe, non-mutating, or what fields are returned. It adds some context beyond the schema but lacks depth.

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 front-loads the core purpose ('List monitored hosts') and follows with concise, useful details about filtering and pagination. Every word earns its place; no unnecessary information or repetition.

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 list tool with 4 parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys the primary use case and key capabilities. It could be enhanced by mentioning that results are host objects or by referencing pagination defaults, but overall it is complete enough for an agent to understand and use the tool 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?

The schema covers all parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The phrase 'Filter by name, state, or page through results' synthesizes the parameters (search, states, page/limit) into meaningful capabilities, adding value beyond the individual schema descriptions by clarifying their combined purpose.

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 and resource: 'List monitored hosts in Centreon.' This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_host' (singular host) and 'list_host_groups' (host groups), making the tool's specific purpose unambiguous.

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 by mentioning 'Filter by name, state, or page through results,' which hints at common scenarios but does not explicitly discuss when to use list_hosts versus alternatives like get_host or list_host_groups. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated, so guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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