List Services

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful output context by naming service names, memos, and roles, but it does not mention pagination, ordering, account scoping, or other operational behavior. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not rich.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the usage bullets are easy to scan. The example block for a zero-argument call is somewhat redundant, but it does not create meaningful bloat.

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 parameterless read-only list tool with no output schema, the description provides enough to call it correctly: what it retrieves and when to use it. It could be stronger with account-scope or pagination details, but the core is complete.

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?

There are zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not applicable and the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain any input 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: retrieve all services, and clarifies the fields shown (names, memos, roles). It is clear against most siblings by resource, though it does not explicitly name alternatives such as get_service_metrics or list_hosts.

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 'USE THIS TOOL WHEN USERS' section gives concrete triggering scenarios: getting a service list and viewing service names, memos, and roles. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives, but the context is clear.

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