list_services

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'list' without indicating whether the operation is read-only, safe, or has any side effects. No mention of pagination, rate limits, or required permissions, which is insufficient for a mutation-free list tool.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It earns its place by being minimal and direct, though it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 has 6 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity (container-based filtering), the description is too minimal. It does not explain the return format, how containers work, or any important usage details like default limit. This leaves the agent underinformed.

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% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate. No explanation of how parameters interact (e.g., name filtering alongside container filters) is given.

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 'List service objects' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (service objects), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_service' which retrieves a single service. However, it could be more specific by mentioning it returns multiple objects.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_service_groups' or 'list_addresses'. The description does not provide any context about filtering or container-based usage, leaving the agent without direction on appropriate scenarios.

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