list_swarm_services

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description's burden is lower. It usefully discloses the shape of the result (image, mode, desired vs running replicas), which substitutes for the absent output schema, but says nothing about ordering, failure modes outside swarm mode, or result size.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the returned-field preview attached in the same clause. No filler, no 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?

For a one-parameter read-only list tool the description plus annotations cover the essentials, and the mention of returned fields compensates for the missing output schema. It is still silent on environment prerequisites and on what an empty or failed result means, which matters for a swarm-specific call.

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% on the single agent_id parameter, including the 'local' special value and the omit-for-all behavior, so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds nothing about the filter, which is acceptable at this coverage level.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("List Docker Swarm services") and even previews the returned fields (image, mode, replica counts), so it is clearly distinct from list_swarm_nodes and list_swarm_tasks. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings as alternatives, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites (e.g. the host must be a swarm manager), and no routing to alternatives such as list_swarm_tasks or list_swarm_nodes. The agent must infer that this tool is for service-level inventory purely from the word "services".

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