list_servers

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral value by enumerating the lifecycle state values (RUNNING, SHUTDOWN, STARTING, FAILED_NOT_RESTARTABLE, ...) and clarifying that stopped servers are included — a non-obvious inclusion that an agent could otherwise miss.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and resource, followed by a differentiating scope claim. 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?

Output schema exists, so return structure needn't be explained; the description still helpfully names key fields and the STOPPED-inclusion behavior. Covers what an agent needs to call it correctly for a 0-param 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?

There are no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a no-argument, full-domain listing, adding meaning about scope beyond the empty schema.

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 (List) and resource (every configured server in the WebLogic domain) with the exact fields returned (lifecycle state, listen port, machine). The distinguishing claim 'the only view that includes stopped servers' cleanly separates it from siblings like get_server_health and get_jvm_stats.

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 states the condition that selects this tool over alternatives: it is the only view that includes stopped servers. An agent knows to use it when it needs a full inventory rather than live metrics or health.

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