list_systems

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

No annotations exist; the description discloses that the tool lists 'active' systems, provides return fields, and caps limit at 500. However, it does not explain what 'active' means, pagination behavior beyond limit/offset, or permissions required.

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 extremely concise with three sentences that front-load the core purpose, then provide parameter and return structure details without unnecessary fluff.

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 tool is a simple list operation with an output schema, the description covers input constraints, return fields, and a practical usage hint. It lacks only minor details like error handling or filtering capabilities.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds value by noting limit is capped at 500 and inputs are optional. However, it does not explain offset semantics or expected data types beyond the schema defaults.

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 'List active systems in Uyuni,' specifying verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on a general listing, and provides a practical hint about using system_id for other tools.

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 mentions optional inputs and a limit cap, but does not explicitly clarify when to use this tool versus alternatives like find_systems_by_name or check_all_systems_for_updates. The note about system_id offers some integration guidance.

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