List all client nodes in a HashiCorp Nomad cluster to inspect node status, resources, and availability.
List client nodes in the Nomad cluster.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "list_nodes"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without any annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It merely says 'List client nodes' without disclosing whether the operation is read-only, the response format, or any potential side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool with no safety 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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the core functionality. It wastes no words.
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 with no parameters and no output schema, so the minimal description covers the basic purpose. However, it does not clarify the relationship with get_node or list_jobs, which slightly reduces completeness. Given the low complexity, this is acceptable.
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 input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The baseline score of 4 applies, and the description does not need to add parameter details.
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 (client nodes), and the domain (Nomad cluster). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_jobs and get_node by specifying 'client nodes'.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_node for individual node details or list_jobs for job listings. There is no explicit or implicit usage context beyond the basic listing operation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.