pdm_pve_node_list

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It characterizes the tool as low-risk ('DIAGNOSE (LOW)'), mentions the output shape ('Shape equals PVE /nodes'), and gives a validation timestamp. However, it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, though 'list' implies it.

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 extremely concise (4 lines) with no filler. Each sentence provides distinct information: purpose, parameter guidance, technical note, and configuration requirement. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, parameter guidance, config needs, and output shape. It misses potential details like error handling or pagination, but for a straightforward list tool, this is sufficient.

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 description adds meaning to the `remote` parameter ('remote name from pdm_remotes_list') beyond the schema, which lacks description. For `proximo_target`, the schema already provides a detailed description, so no additional value. Given 50% schema coverage, the description compensates well.

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 nodes') and the resource ('in a PDM-registered PVE remote'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like `pdm_node_status` or `pve_node_list`. The 'DIAGNOSE (LOW)' prefix further clarifies the intent.

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 specifies that the `remote` parameter should come from `pdm_remotes_list` and that PROXIMO_PDM_* config is needed, but it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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