v2_services

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world semantics, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-obvious behavior: it 'flags insecure or unset services', telling the agent the response carries security annotations rather than raw config alone.

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 scoping statement 'Every site service in one call' is correctly front-loaded, and the second sentence about security flags earns its place. However, the 16-item enumeration is a long run-on list that could be trimmed or organized, inflating length without adding decision-relevant detail.

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 aggregate tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what data is bundled and that security flags are included, so an agent can decide to call it. It falls short on the siteId parameter semantics and on any indication of response size or structure.

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 single parameter siteId has 0% schema description coverage and is never mentioned in the description. With one undocumented param the description should compensate by explaining scoping (whether siteId is required, what happens if omitted), and it does not.

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 names the resource (all site services) and enumerates the concrete service types it aggregates, so an agent can tell it apart from narrower siblings like v2_set_service or v2_ssids. The verb is only implied ('in one call') rather than stated, but the intent to retrieve an aggregate snapshot is clear.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives (e.g. v2_set_service for mutation, v2_security_audit for deeper security posture). The agent must infer usage from the service list alone.

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