pve_firewall_alias_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 explicitly labels the operation as 'read', indicating no side effects. The description also explains the absence of node-scope aliases, adding useful context. However, it does not mention authentication or rate limits, which are minor 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?

The description is two concise sentences, front-loading the main purpose and quickly adding a crucial constraint. No redundant information.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are documented elsewhere. However, with low parameter description coverage (20%) and no explanations for key parameters, the description is not fully complete. The description covers scope constraints well but leaves other parameters ambiguous.

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 only 20% (only proximo_target described). The description does not explain the other parameters (kind, node, vmid, scope) beyond noting that scope can be cluster or guest. The agent must infer their meaning from parameter names alone, which may not be 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 uses the verb 'list' with the resource 'firewall aliases (named CIDRs)', clearly defining the tool's action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create/delete/update by specifying 'read', and adds scope clarification (cluster or guest only).

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 states the valid scopes (cluster or guest) and declares that the PVE API has no node-scope aliases, guiding the agent to use this tool only for those scopes and implicitly suggesting other tools for node firewall operations.

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