list_users_settings_plex_servers

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

Annotations already declare this tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, which covers the safety profile. The description adds the exact HTTP endpoint but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as whether the result is sorted, paginated, or requires specific authentication. It does not contradict the annotations, so a mid-range score is appropriate.

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 extremely concise: a one-line summary plus the exact REST path. No filler or redundancy; every token adds value. The endpoint line is useful because it grounds the operation in a concrete URI.

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 tool has zero parameters, an output schema, and annotations that establish its safe read-only behavior, the description is largely complete. It could briefly note that this returns all Plex servers, but the name and endpoint already convey the plural scope, so nothing critical 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?

The tool has zero parametersainer, so there is no parameter semantics to document. Per the baseline rule for 0-param tools, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description's mention of the resource is sufficient.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Plex servers'), which clearly identifies the operation. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling get_users_settings_plex_servers_by_server_id, but the plural 'servers' and the endpoint path disambiguate it as a list-all operation.

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 usage is implied from the description: call this to retrieve the list of Plex servers. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this versus the singular get_users_settings_plex_servers_by_server_id or other Plex-settings endpoints, so an agent must infer the distinction from naming and the endpoint.

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