list_fields

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not clarify whether group/host are used for scoping or authentication, whether results are limited, or whether the operation has any side effects. This is minimal transparency beyond the operation name.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is concise and to the point, though its brevity contributes to the lack of contextual detail elsewhere.

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 read tool with three required parameters, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, this description is too sparse to be complete. The output schema may cover return values, but the roles of host/group, the selection conditions, and behavioral expectations are all missing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented parameters. It adds meaning only to 'plugin' by identifying it as the thing whose fields are being listed; 'host' and 'group' remain semantically unexplained. This does not adequately compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 phrase 'List fields for a given plugin' names a specific operation and resource, and it is reasonably distinguishable from sibling tools like list_plugins and list_hosts. However, it does not explain why 'group' and 'host' are also required, leaving the exact scope of the tool partially underspecified.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool instead of siblings such as render_graph, get_metadata, or fetch_series. No prerequisites, exclusions, or selection conditions are provided, so the agent is left to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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