pve_discover

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'walk the API tree' context, but this is more about usage than behavioral traits. It does not cover rate limits, auth, or response details, though the output schema handles return values.

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 concise and front-loaded: a two-sentence purpose followed by a compact Args section with examples. Every sentence earns its place with no repetition or filler.

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 present, and a single well-explained parameter, the description is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool. The 'curated tools do not cover' statement provides key ecosystem context.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the path parameter, but the description compensates by defining it as the API path to list and providing concrete examples ('/', '/nodes'). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema with a default of '/'.

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 the specific verb 'List' and resource 'child endpoints of a Proxmox API path', and explicitly mentions covering endpoints the curated tools do not, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_guests or storage_content.

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 description states it is for endpoints the curated tools do not cover, providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it falls short of full exclusivity.

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