list-services

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, describing the tool's read-only and open-world nature. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., pagination, result limits, or state changes). Since it does not contradict annotations, a 3 is appropriate—neutral with no added value.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that concisely states the tool's action and key feature. No redundant information. Perfect length and clarity.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns (e.g., list of service objects). It only mentions 'list services with filtering,' leaving return format, pagination behavior, and filter combinations underdefined. Adequate but incomplete for operational use.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all five parameters. The description adds 'with filtering' but does not elaborate on parameter usage beyond what schema already documents. Baseline 3 applies when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 services from Datadog Software Catalog, with filtering capability. It distinguishes from sibling list tools which target different resources (e.g., list-hosts, list-containers). Verb and resource are specific, earning a 5.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While context suggests it's for listing services, no when-not statements or alternative mentions are provided. A slightly below average score due to missing usage context.

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