pve_node_hosts_get

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

No annotations exist, so the description fully carries the burden. It discloses it is read-only, returns a dict with data and digest, and explains the digest's role for optimistic concurrency. Sufficient for a safe read operation.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences clearly convey purpose, endpoint, return type, and connection to sibling. 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?

For a simple read tool with output schema and full parameter coverage, the description is complete. It explains the return value and ties to the sibling set tool. Could mention the authentication scope but not essential.

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 descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no extra depth beyond but mentions the node in the endpoint URL. Baseline of 3 applies as schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 it gets /etc/hosts content, labels it as READ-ONLY, specifies the API endpoint, and distinguishes it from the sibling pve_node_hosts_set by mentioning the digest is for optimistic concurrency on a follow-up set.

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 implies usage: use this to read hosts content, with the returned digest for subsequent updates via pve_node_hosts_set. It does not explicitly list when not to use, but the context is clear and the sibling tool is named.

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