pve_mapping_pci_list

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It explicitly states read-only, no state change, and lists the return fields (mapping ID, device list, description). Explains scope (cluster) and limitation (VM-only). Could mention additional behavioral details like permissions or pagination, but overall transparent.

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 front-loaded with key information ('READ-ONLY: list all PCI device mappings at cluster scope'), followed by two concise sentences providing detail and alternatives. No wasted words or 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 the tool's simplicity (read-only list with one optional parameter and an output schema), the description covers all necessary aspects: behavior, scope, return fields, and alternatives. No gaps for an agent to invoke correctly.

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% with one optional parameter having a clear description. The tool description does not add parameter-specific information beyond what is in the schema, which is acceptable but not exceptional. Baseline score applied.

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?

Clearly states 'list all PCI device mappings at cluster scope', specifying verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings by referencing pve_hardware_list and pve_mapping_pci_create, providing clear differentiation.

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 notes that it is read-only with no state change. Provides when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance by suggesting alternatives: pve_hardware_list for raw devices and pve_mapping_pci_create for creation. Also notes VM-only applicability.

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