npm_list_streams

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only listing, but discloses nothing about pagination, result limits, ordering, whether the list is scoped to the authenticated user, or what happens on an empty result set.

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 zero filler. Every word earns its place and the key resource type is stated immediately.

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 a fully documented 2-parameter schema and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It would be stronger with a note on result volume/pagination or a pointer to the singular get tool, but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

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 both 'query' and 'expand' are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or semantics beyond what the schema states, which matches the baseline 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb ('List all') and a precise resource ('TCP/UDP stream proxies configured in Nginx Proxy Manager'). This implicitly distinguishes it from sibling list tools that return other host types (npm_list_proxy_hosts, npm_list_redirection_hosts, npm_list_dead_hosts), though it never names them or points to the singular npm_get_stream counterpart.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer npm_get_stream over listing, and no indication of how 'query' or 'expand' should be used to narrow results. The agent must infer everything about invocation context.

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