list_guests

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It adequately lists the return fields and optional filter, but it does not mention potential limitations like pagination, performance, or whether stopped/template guests are included. For a read-only listing, this is acceptable but not exhaustive.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the purpose and then providing the return fields and filter. Every sentence is necessary and there is no wasted text.

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 low complexity (one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the purpose, return fields, and the optional filter, leaving no significant gaps.

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 schema coverage is 0%, but the description adds value by explaining the optional 'type' parameter with its enum values ('qemu' or 'lxc') and its purpose as a filter. This goes beyond the schema which only lists the enum values.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'all VMs and containers across the cluster'. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling list tools like list_nodes and list_backups by focusing on guests.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (to list all guests) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. However, the purpose is straightforward.

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