system_info

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

Description clearly marks the operation as [READ] and lists the data returned. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden; it adequately conveys that this is a read-only tool with no 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 extremely concise with exactly two sentences: first sentence states the purpose and data returned, second sentence explains the parameter. No wasted words.

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 read tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides a complete list of returned fields and parameter behavior. No additional information is needed.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds full meaning for the only parameter: 'target: TrueNAS target name from config; omit to use the default.' This provides context beyond the schema's type and default.

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?

Description clearly states the tool reads TrueNAS system summary and lists specific fields (version, hostname, memory, cores, uptime). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'overview' which may provide a broader view.

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 a usage note for the optional target parameter but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like overview or pool_list. No context on alternatives.

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