pve_node_services_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It explicitly declares the tool as 'READ-ONLY' and 'No state change,' which accurately conveys the behavioral trait. However, it does not mention any authentication requirements or other potential side effects, though for a read-only list this is acceptable. Slight room for improvement by noting that it requires read permissions.

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 concise with three sentences: stating the purpose, explaining the output, and directing to sibling tools. 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 description covers the tool's purpose, output format, and relationship to siblings. However, it does not explain what happens when the optional node parameter is omitted (it defaults to the configured node), though the schema provides this. The presence of an output schema (context signal) further reduces the burden. Overall, fairly complete for a simple list tool.

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 the schema already documents both parameters. The description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond the schema. It does not mention the node default or the proximo_target parameter. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 function: 'list all services on a PVE node.' It uses a specific verb-resource pair and differentiates from siblings pve_node_service_status and pve_node_service_control by explicitly mentioning their purposes.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'No state change' and instructs to use pve_node_service_status for a single service's state and pve_node_service_control to change state. This provides clear usage guidance and exclusion criteria.

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