jumpserver_assets

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: capture is via KoKo menu command 'p', parsed locally, and cached ~5 minutes, plus the auto-login hazard. It stops short of describing the result shape or pagination/truncation limits for large asset sets.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the core capability and its 'without entering' constraint lead, followed by mechanism, then warnings. Every clause carries information, though the parenthetical stacking makes it slightly hard to scan.

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 read-only listing tool with full annotation and schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the mechanism, caching window, filter options, and the critical safety warning. Only the result shape/size behavior is unaddressed.

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 all four parameters are already documented. The description restates the filter/group capability but adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema, and says nothing about refresh or includeRawText. Baseline 3 is appropriate 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 and resource ('List the assets this account is authorized for') and immediately scopes it ('WITHOUT entering any of them'), which distinguishes it from jumpserver_enter, jumpserver_run, and jumpserver_batch. An agent knows exactly what this returns without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly names when to call it ('Call this before jumpserver_run/jumpserver_batch') and names the alternatives it feeds. It also gives negative guidance ('never guess IPs', 'never type an asset name into the menu') with the reason (KoKo auto-logs-in on a unique hit), which is actionable routing advice.

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