Qna Discover Targets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the exact side effect (writes new hosts to ~/.bigfix/remote_clients.toml), the probe sources, the negative constraints (never uses SSH discovery, never prompts), and the performance cost (can take minutes). Nothing about mutation behavior is left to inference.

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?

Front-loads the core action, then layers mechanism, constraints, performance, and usage guidance in short declarative sentences. Every clause earns its place, including the CLI analogy and the 'Evaluates nothing' caveat.

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?

Although an output schema exists and return values need not be explained, the description still names the returned fields (path, added, inventory). Combined with the side-effect, performance, and usage detail, an agent has everything needed to call this 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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond what the empty schema already conveys. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.

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?

States a specific verb sequence (find/probe and add) over a specific resource (qna targets on the server's host) and names the concrete side effect against ~/.bigfix/remote_clients.toml. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like qna_list_targets and qna_eval_client_relevance.

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?

Gives explicit triggering conditions: use when qna_list_targets shows no or too few inventory hosts, and clarifies the edge case that qna_eval_client_relevance only self-discovers when no inventory file exists. Names both alternative tools and the condition that selects this one.

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