list_hostsRetrieve hosts from a cluster or the entire Cloudera Manager deployment, including IP, rack, cores, memory, health, and last heartbeat; optionally filter to only unhealthy hosts.
Lista hosts (de um cluster ou de todo o CM): IP, rack, cores, memória, saúde, último heartbeat.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cluster | No | ||
| only_unhealthy | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description still makes clear that this is a read-only listing operation by using "Lista" and by enumerating returned fields. However, it does not disclose permissions, pagination, rate limits, or any other behavioral context beyond the basic scope.
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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. The scope and returned fields are packed efficiently into one compact statement.
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?
An output schema exists, so return-value details do not need to be fully spelled out here. Still, the description omits meaning for the only_unhealthy filter and provides no annotation-level behavioral context, leaving noticeable gaps for a tool with zero schema description coverage.
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 0%, so the description must explain the two parameters. It effectively explains that the cluster parameter scopes results to one cluster or all of the CM, but it never mentions the only_unhealthy parameter or what health filtering means.
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 and resource ("Lista hosts") and clearly states the scope: a cluster's hosts or all hosts in the CM. It also names the returned fields, which makes its purpose distinct from sibling tools like get_host, list_clusters, and cluster_health_summary.
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 parenthetical "(de um cluster ou de todo o CM)" implies how the optional cluster parameter changes scope, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool instead of list_clusters or get_host. There is also no guidance on when to use the only_unhealthy filter.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.