pv_list

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

The description explicitly marks the tool as read-only via the '[READ]' tag and lists the output fields. Without annotations, this provides adequate transparency for a simple list operation, though lacks details on permissions or side effects.

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 highly concise, using only two sentences to convey purpose and parameter details. It is front-loaded with the core action and fields, with no extraneous information.

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 no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what is listed and the parameter role. It lacks details like pagination or result limits, but overall is adequate.

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?

The sole parameter 'target' is described as 'k8s target name from config; omit to use the default', adding meaning beyond the empty schema description. This briefly explains its purpose and default behavior.

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 the tool's purpose: listing persistent volumes with specific fields (name, capacity, status, claim, class, age). The '[READ]' prefix clarifies the operation type, and the tool is distinct from siblings like 'pvc_list' for volume claims.

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 implicitly indicates when to use (to list persistent volumes) but provides no guidance on when not to use or differentiate from alternatives. There is no mention of alternatives or context-specific scenarios.

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