rundeck_list_nodes

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry behavioral load. It states the action and return fields but omits details like pagination, default behavior without filter, permission requirements, or error cases. Adequate but not fully transparent.

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 17 words, directly stating what the tool does and what it returns. No wasted words; front-loaded with main action.

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?

No output schema, but description explains return content (hostname, OS, tags). Lacks edge case handling or deeper context, but sufficient for a simple list tool given sibling differentiation.

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% (both parameters described). Description adds context about output but no additional param specifics beyond schema. Baseline 3 appropriate as description does not enhance param understanding.

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?

Clear verb ('List') and resource ('nodes in a project') with specific additional details about optional filter and returned fields (hostname, OS, tags). Distinguishes well from sibling tools like rundeck_get_node (single node) and rundeck_list_projects (different resource).

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?

Implies use for listing nodes with optional filtering, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_node for a specific node, or when filter is needed). Lacks when-not or prerequisites.

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