sites_list

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default compact mode and warns that the full response (~3KB/site) can overflow context. However, it does not mention any idempotency or read-only nature, though implied by 'list'.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the tool's main purpose ('List all websites'), followed by compact mode explanation and alternative recommendation. Highly efficient.

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 no output schema, the description covers key behavioral aspects (default mode, size warning). It references fields listed in schema and provides alternative. Could mention response is an array, but not critical. Adequate for a list tool with sibling 'site_get'.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the compact parameter's effect on response size and number of fields, and warns about context overflow. This enriches the schema defaults.

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 explicitly states 'List all websites managed by FastPanel' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'site_get' by noting that 'site_get(id)' is for full details, clarifying the scope.

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 gives clear when-to-use guidance: it warns about compact mode vs full response size and potential context overflow. It explicitly recommends using 'site_get(id)' for full details of a specific site, aiding tool selection.

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