Google Compute Engine

list_disks

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists Compute Engine disks. Details for each disk include name, ID, description, creation timestamp, size, type, status, last attach timestamp, and last detach timestamp. Requires project and zone as input.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zone`	Yes	Required. The zone of the disks to list.
`project`	Yes	Required. Project ID for this request.
`pageSize`	No	Optional. The maximum number of results per page that should be returned.
`pageToken`	No	Optional. The page token received from the previous call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`disks`	No	The list of disk basic info.
`nextPageToken`	No	The page token to retrieve the next page of results.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly and idempotent behavior. Description adds return field details and required inputs (project, zone), which is useful but does not disclose pagination behavior or zonal scoping beyond the input parameter.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with action and resource, no redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given output schema exists and annotations cover safety, description adequately covers purpose and prerequisites. Minor gap: zonal scope not explicitly stated beyond the zone parameter.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, and description adds minimal parameter context beyond restating required inputs. Baseline of 3 applies since schema handles parameter documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description uses specific verb 'Lists' with resource 'Compute Engine disks' and enumerates returned fields. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_disk_basic_info (single disk) and list_instance_attached_disks (instance scoped).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, there is no mention of exclusions or alternative tools for different disk listing needs.

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

All Google Compute Engine tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource-action combination. For resources with both basic and detailed getters (reservations, templates), the suffixes clearly differentiate them, and list vs get distinctions are unambiguous. No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (e.g., create_instance, list_disks, get_zone_operation). Getters consistently use descriptive suffixes like basic_info, details, or properties. No mixed naming conventions or vague verbs.

Tool Count4/5

29 tools is slightly above the ideal range but justified given the breadth of Google Compute Engine resources covered (instances, disks, templates, reservations, commitments, MIGs, snapshots, images, machine types, accelerator types). Each tool serves a specific purpose and contributes to the overall scope.

Completeness2/5

The toolset is heavily read-oriented. While instances have full lifecycle coverage (create, delete, start, stop, reset, set machine type), most other resources lack write operations: disks, templates, reservations, commitments, snapshots, and MIGs only have get/list tools. This creates dead ends for agents needing to create or modify these resources, which is a significant gap for a GCE management server.

Resources

Need Help?