list_services

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the mention of filtering adds useful context. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, or any side effects. It is minimally adequate 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, well-structured sentence with no redundancy. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by a concise list of filter options.

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?

The tool has five optional parameters and no output schema, so the description should ideally mention return behavior or pagination. The description covers purpose and filters but omits what the response looks like and how pagination works. With the schema covering parameters, this is a moderate gap.

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 coverage is 100% and every parameter has a description. The tool description adds only a high-level summary of filters ('host, state, or service name') that maps to parameters already described in the schema. It does not add significant new meaning beyond 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 a specific action ('List') and resource ('monitored services in Centreon'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_service and list_service_groups by focusing on listing with filters. It is specific and 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 when to use the tool by stating its filtering capabilities (host, state, service name), giving clear context for typical listing tasks. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the verb 'List' naturally separates it from single-service retrieval.

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