dos_whitelist_show

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full safety burden and explicitly discloses 'read-only'. It also specifies that it targets the whitelist rather than any other DoS state, which is the key non-destructive behavior an agent needs to know.

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 entire description is one front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name. Every word adds meaning, including the 'read-only' safety qualifier.

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 zero-parameter read-only show command, the description is nearly complete: it states what is displayed and that invocation is safe. It does not describe the output format or fields, but 'Show ... list' conveys that the result is the whitelist content.

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?

The input schema is empty and schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is needed because the tool takes no arguments.

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?

States a specific action ('Show') on a specific resource ('DoS passing (white) list') and marks it read-only. The 'white' parenthetical explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling dos_blacklist_show, so an agent can choose it without needing to inspect schemas.

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 this is a read-only inspection tool, but it names no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions. Context from sibling names (dos_blacklist_show, dos_activate) suggests it, but the description itself does not provide routing guidance.

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