list-services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions 'with filtering' but fails to mention pagination behavior, rate limits, or that the tool is read-only. The presence of pageSize and pageNumber in the schema is not leveraged in the description.

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 very short (6 words) and front-loaded with the key verb and noun. It is concise but at the cost of completeness; however, it meets the minimum for a simple list operation.

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 complexity of 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return format, pagination defaults, or how filters interact. An agent would need to guess from parameter names.

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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add much. It adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'services from Datadog Software Catalog', providing a specific purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list-teams or list-hosts by specifying the Software Catalog context, though it could be more explicit about differentiating.

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. With many list and search tools as siblings, an agent cannot determine if this is the right choice for a given query without hints about its scope (e.g., 'use for catalog services, not for metrics or logs').

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