whm_list_packages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states it lists packages, which is a read-only operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits like required permissions or side effects. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but could mention if any restrictions apply.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the tool's action and scope.

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 (1 parameter with good schema description, no output schema), the description is mostly complete. It explains what it does and how to get the parameter value. However, it could briefly mention the return format (e.g., list of package names) for added completeness.

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 describes the 'account' parameter as 'Account alias from accounts.json'. The description adds value by suggesting 'use list_accounts to see options', which helps the agent understand how to obtain valid values, going beyond the schema.

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 the tool's purpose: 'List all hosting packages/plans configured on the WHM server'. It specifies the verb 'List', resource 'hosting packages/plans', and scope 'on the WHM server', distinguishing it from sibling tools like whm_list_accounts or whm_list_ips.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool or alternatives. However, the context implies it is used to view available packages before creating accounts or managing them. A reference to sibling list_accounts for the parameter provides indirect usage context.

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