Cordon Capabilities

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

The description matches the readOnlyHint annotation by indicating a listing action with no side effects. However, it does not elaborate on any filtering behavior or output details, leaving some ambiguity about the exact behavior beyond the annotation.

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 clear sentence, extremely concise and well-structured. It communicates the core functionality without unnecessary words, achieving high efficiency.

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 simplicity of the tool, the description is incomplete because it does not clarify the role of the parameters, does not mention any output schema (despite one being present), and lacks usage guidance. This leaves gaps for an agent trying to understand how to invoke and interpret results 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 input schema includes two optional parameters (mode and phase) but the description does not explain their purpose. It is unclear whether they are filters or output projections, and the description mentions 'phase' and 'mode' as output fields, which could confuse. No parameter description is provided, leading to poor semantics.

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) and the resource (registered capabilities) along with the output fields (phase, mode, origin). It is distinct from sibling tools like cordon_status, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from other listing tools, so it's slightly below perfect.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cordon_load_scope or cordon_status. The description simply states what it does without any context on appropriate use cases or conditions.

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