pagerduty_list_services

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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, so the description does not need to carry the safety profile. It adds only that all services are listed and that filtering is optional; it says nothing about pagination, ordering, or result shape.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by the optional filter. No text is wasted or buried.

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 simple read-only list tool with complete parameter descriptions and clear annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. It could mention return shape or pagination behavior, but the missing output schema is the main reason it is not fully 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines api_key, query, and limit. The description reinforces that query filters by name but does not add syntax, range, or behavior details beyond what the schema provides.

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 all services in a PagerDuty account' — and is easily distinguished from sibling PagerDuty tools such as pagerduty_list_incidents and pagerduty_list_oncalls.

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?

It implies the tool's usage by noting an optional name filter, but does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. Since there is no competing sibling for listing services, the gap is modest but still present.

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