pbs_metrics_influxdb_http_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the 'token' field is stripped from the response at the read layer, that the stripping is required (not just defensive), and that the tool 'Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config.' This goes beyond basic behavior and adds important context for the agent.

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 compact with two sentences, but includes parenthetical information and a reference to a module docstring. It is efficient but could be slightly clearer by separating the config requirement from the stripping detail. No wasted words.

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 that the tool has one optional parameter, an output schema exists, and it is a list operation, the description covers the essential points: read-only, lists servers, strips tokens, requires config. It lacks explicit mention of idempotency or safety, but 'READ-ONLY' implies it.

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 has 100% coverage (one parameter with a description). The description only mentions config dependency but does not add new parameter-level details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema is sufficient.

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 starts with 'READ-ONLY: list configured PBS InfluxDB http metric servers,' which clearly states the action (list), the resource (configured PBS InfluxDB HTTP metric servers), and its read-only nature. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pbs_metrics_influxdb_udp_list (UDP) and pbs_metrics_servers_list (general servers) by specifying 'http metric servers'.

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 indicates that the tool lists configured servers and is read-only, but it does not explicitly provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., pbs_metrics_influxdb_http_get or pbs_metrics_influxdb_udp_list). There are no when-not-to-use statements or mention of prerequisites beyond the config note.

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