infrastructure_overview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are aggregated across three external systems in a single request, but says nothing about freshness, latency, or what happens when one system is unreachable.

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?

A single short sentence with the scope front-loaded and no filler. It is a fragment rather than a full clause, but nothing wasted.

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 values need not be described, and a zero-parameter read-only tool carries little behavioral burden. What remains slightly thin is the framing of what the counts mean (e.g., whether this is a health/summary view).

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 semantics for the description to explain. Baseline 4 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb ('Counts') and the three resources covered (Docker, Nginx Proxy Manager, Cloudflare DNS), which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools that each list one resource type. It stops short of saying what exactly is counted (containers? zones? records?).

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?

'in one call' implies this is the aggregate/summary entry point rather than a per-resource listing tool, so usage is implied. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over homelab_health or homelab_modules, nor any prerequisite or exclusion.

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