List Services

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to repeat that. However, it adds no further behavioral disclosure (e.g., pagination, authorization, or return format), so it does not exceed what annotations provide.

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 tool's purpose and scope. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and annotations covering behavior, the description is fairly complete. It lacks mention of the return format (e.g., names vs. full details), but given the tool's simplicity and no output schema, this is a minor gap.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'namespace', and the schema's description already explains its function. The tool description adds no additional detail beyond summarizing the parameter's role.

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 all services in a namespace or across all namespaces', specifying the verb 'list', the resource 'services', and distinguishing the two scopes. This effectively differentiates it from sibling tools like list_pods or list_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 implies usage for listing services but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_pods or list_deployments. No exclusions or context for when not to use it is given.

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