Cluster resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it's a 'combined view' and mentions the type filter, which harmonizes with the annotations. No contradictions; the extra context is useful but not extensive, so a 4 is appropriate.

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?

Two concise sentences with no superfluous words. The first sentence states the core purpose; the second adds actionable guidance on filtering. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 (one optional parameter, no output schema, openWorldHint), the description adequately explains the combined nature and filter usage. It doesn't detail return fields, but with openWorldHint that is acceptable. Complete for this context.

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 a clear parameter description ('Optional resource type filter'). The description merely restates this usage without adding additional semantic detail like format or default behavior, meeting the baseline for full coverage.

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 provides a 'single combined view of cluster resources' listing VMs, containers, storage, and nodes. This verb+resource combination is precise and distinguishes it from siblings like pve_list_vms or pve_list_storage, which focus on individual resource types.

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 mentions using the type filter to narrow results, implying use cases. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over sibling tools (e.g., for a complete overview vs. specific lists) or provide exclusion criteria.

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