pve_ceph_flags_list

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

With no annotations, description fully states read-only, lists all flags, mentions expected shape, and includes a caution about shape verification. No mention of auth or rate limits, but acceptable for a read-only list.

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?

Description is extremely concise, front-loaded with 'READ-ONLY', lists flags, gives HTTP path, shape note, and cross-references. No unnecessary 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?

Output schema exists so return values are covered. Description covers purpose, usage, and behavioral aspects. Could mention use cases like monitoring, but overall adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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% and the schema already fully describes the optional 'proximo_target' parameter. Description adds no additional parameter meaning, meeting the baseline.

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 'READ-ONLY: status of all 11 Ceph cluster flags' and lists all flags. It distinguishes from siblings by naming pve_ceph_flags_set and pve_ceph_flag_set for changing flags.

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?

Explicitly says 'READ-ONLY' and 'To change flags use ...', guiding when to use this tool vs alternatives. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' but alternatives are clear.

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