list_services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does mention the runtime state values, which adds useful context. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or has no side effects, though 'List' implies this. The description is adequate for a simple list operation but not richly transparent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It clearly communicates the main function and the specific state filter in an efficient manner.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return values are likely covered there. However, the description omits any meaning for the payload parameter and provides no usage guidance relative to sibling tools. These gaps make it minimally complete but not comprehensive.

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 single optional parameter 'payload' is not mentioned in the description, and the schema provides no description for it (coverage 0%). This leaves the parameter's purpose entirely unexplained, offering no guidance on what values to pass or how it affects the listing.

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 tool lists FairCom services and includes their runtime state (enabled/running/disabled). It uses a specific verb (List) and resource (FairCom services), and the added state detail distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_table_columns or list_inputs.

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 a read-only listing operation but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives. It offers no exclusion criteria or reference to sibling tools like manage_service for actions on services. The usage context is clear from the verb and resource, but not explicit.

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