whm_list_services

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'check status' implying a read-only operation, but lacks details on return format, error handling, or permission requirements. The listing of example services adds some context, but deeper behavioral traits are omitted.

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?

Single sentence with no filler, immediately states action and scope. Every word adds value.

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?

Despite having only one well-documented parameter, the lack of output schema means the agent has no idea what the response looks like. The description should at least hint at the return structure or whether it's a list of services with statuses. Adequate but incomplete.

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 for the single parameter 'account' is 100% (description in schema). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's 'Account alias from accounts.json'. Baseline is 3.

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 uses a specific verb-resource combination: 'Check status of all WHM services' and lists examples like Apache, MySQL, cPanel, SMTP. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like whm_restart_service (restart) and whm_server_info (server load).

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 implies usage for checking service status, and siblings like whm_restart_service provide a natural alternative for restarts. However, it does not explicitly state when to use or when not to use, nor does it mention alternatives or prerequisites.

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