get_hosts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of result limits, pagination, or how multiple filters combine. An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, making 3 the right baseline.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in a single sentence, followed by a compact Args block with no filler. The docstring section is conventional but every line conveys distinct information.

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?

With annotations covering safety, an output schema covering returns, and the description covering all four optional parameters, the definition is close to self-sufficient. Gaps are minor: no statement about filter combination semantics or empty-result behavior for a tool where all parameters are optional.

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 carries the full parameter burden, and it does so reasonably: each of the four args gets a one-line meaning, and the tag_value/tag_name dependency is called out. It stops short of explaining the relationship between 'role' and tag_name (presumably a role-tag shorthand) or the effect of the null defaults.

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 opening sentence gives a specific verb and resource ('List Zabbix hosts') plus the two filtering axes (tag or group), so an agent immediately knows what it retrieves. It does not name or contrast any sibling such as get_host_items, but the resource is distinct enough that confusion is unlikely.

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?

Usage is implied by the filter vocabulary rather than stated: there is no 'use this when...' or 'do not use for...' guidance relative to get_host_items or get_problems. The one genuinely useful constraint ('tag_value requires tag_name') is a parameter dependency, not a when-to-use rule.

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