List HA-managed resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false. The description adds that it lists resources 'currently managed,' implying a live snapshot. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like pagination, sorting, or filtering, which would be valuable for a list operation.

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 description is a single sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the essential action and resource, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should hint at the return structure (e.g., list of IDs, names, status). It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about what information is returned for each VM or container. Given the simplicity of the tool, this is a moderate gap.

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 has no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter information, and it correctly mentions no parameters. It adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but that is acceptable given zero parameters.

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 'List' and clearly identifies the resource: 'VMs and containers currently managed by the HA manager.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_ha_groups (which lists groups) and get_ha_resource_status (which gets status of a specific 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?

The description implies the tool lists all HA-managed resources, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_ha_resource_status or list_ha_groups. No exclusions or context are provided, leaving the agent without clear guidance on choosing among siblings.

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