voog_list_sites

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the return shape ([{name, host}, ...]), the config source (voog.json), and hints at a refresh mechanism (voog_reload_config). It does not explicitly state side effects, but for a list operation, read-only behavior is strongly implied, and the additional context is valuable.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the action and result, providing usage priority, and offering a troubleshooting tip. No filler or redundancy.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description fully covers its role: what it returns, when to call it, and how to handle a missing site. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter information for the description to add. The schema is empty, and the description appropriately focuses on the output. According to the rubric, baseline for 0 parameters is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 ('List') and resource ('sites configured in the global voog.json'), and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like voog_list_my_sites. It also specifies the return format, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 states when to use the tool: 'Call this first to see what sites are available before invoking any other voog_* tool.' It also provides an alternative action when a site is missing: 'call voog_reload_config.' This is clear guidance on usage and alternatives.

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