list-hosts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that: it tells the agent the host_id format and that the value should be taken from this tool rather than assembled by hand, which is a behavioral/usage nuance. It stops short of describing pagination or the full return shape, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loads the action and the key output (host_id), then the usage conditions, then the exclusion. Every sentence carries distinct information (what it returns, the identifier format, when to use, when not to use) with no 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?

No output schema exists, so the description must carry the return-value burden; it names the returned entities and the crucial host_id format, which is largely sufficient. It does not mention pagination or the full field set of each host, leaving a minor gap for a list tool.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description still adds semantic value by explaining that the returned host_id follows the format "https:example.com:443", which is the critical value an agent must extract and reuse.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all hosts (sites) in Webmaster') and immediately clarifies the key artifact returned: the host_id with its exact format ("https:example.com:443"). An agent can distinguish this from sibling tools like get-host or add-host without opening any schema.

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 names both trigger conditions ('which sites are in Webmaster' or 'needs a host_id for any later call') and the exclusion ('Do not use it for one site SQI or problems'), routing to get-summary or get-diagnostics instead. This is the full when/when-not/alternative triad.

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