pve_apt_repositories_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden. It marks the tool as READ-ONLY and discloses the expected response shape, including that it is not live-verified. However, it does not detail authentication needs or error behavior, which are minor gaps for a simple GET endpoint.

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 concise yet informative, front-loading the core purpose and then adding specific details about expected shape and relationships. Every sentence contributes essential context without redundancy.

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 an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the tool's purpose, expected response shape, and how to use the results with sibling tools. For a read-only GET endpoint, this is comprehensive.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning to the parameters beyond the schema's descriptions (node and proximo_target). However, it adds value by explaining how output relates to mutation tools, which is more about output than parameters.

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 'READ-ONLY: get the current APT repository configuration of a PVE node,' providing a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling mutation tools like pve_apt_repository_set and pve_apt_repository_add by noting that this tool provides the coordinates they need.

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 explains the expected response shape and how to use the output with other tools, e.g., 'files[].path + entry index are the coordinates pve_apt_repository_set needs; standard-repos[].handle is what pve_apt_repository_add needs.' It also clarifies that this tool does not handle upgrades, directing users to console for that.

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