List Remotes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by outlining the return payload (array with name, host, port, auth-id, fingerprint, comment), which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 brief: one purpose sentence and one return-format line. It contains no fluff and is front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Given the zero-parameter, read-only nature of the tool, the description fully covers what the agent needs: what the tool does and what it returns. No output schema exists, so the explicit field list compensates well.

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?

No parameters exist, and the schema covers everything. The description does not need to explain parameters, so the 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?

The description clearly states the action (List), the resource (configured remote PBS servers), and the context (used for sync jobs). It distinguishes from sibling tools like pbs_list_datastores or pbs_list_groups by specifying 'remote PBS servers'.

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 implies the tool is for viewing configured remote PBS servers for sync job management, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it over the sibling tools or provide exclusion criteria. There is no direct alternative guidance, so it earns a 3 for implied usage.

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