pve_cluster_resources

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

Declares read-only status and no state change. Since no annotations are provided, the description fully bears the burden and covers key behavioral traits. However, it omits details like pagination or error behavior, which prevents a perfect score.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, filter/safety, and alternatives. No wasted words. The read-only nature is front-loaded.

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?

A simple tool with two optional parameters and an output schema exists. The description covers return type and variations, and the existence of output schema means detail on return format is not needed. Complete for the tool's complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline score is 3. The description restates the resource_type filter values but does not add extra meaning beyond the schema. The proximo_target parameter is not mentioned in the description, so no additional value is provided.

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 tool is READ-ONLY and lists all resources across the cluster (VMs, nodes, storage, SDN). It distinguishes from siblings like pve_cluster_status and pve_list_guests, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides when to use alternatives: 'For overall cluster health/quorum use pve_cluster_status; to list only guests use pve_list_guests.' This tells the agent when not to use this tool.

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