List block storage volumes

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by scoping results to the caller's account and enumerating the returned fields (IDs, sizes, regions, attachment state), which matters since there is no output schema. It does not mention pagination behavior for large result sets.

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?

A single well-formed sentence front-loads the action and scope, then lists return fields. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 a simple read-only list tool with full schema coverage and strong annotations, the description supplies the missing piece — the shape of the returned data. A brief mention of pagination expectations would make it complete, but nothing essential is absent.

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%, so page, pageSize, and vmId are fully documented in the schema itself. The description only confirms that the vmId filter is optional and VM-scoped; it adds no defaults, limits, or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ("List block storage volumes") and names the optional scope (filtered to a VM). It is immediately distinguishable from get_block_storage_volume, which retrieves a single volume, though it never explicitly names that sibling.

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?

Usage is only implied: the agent learns it can list all volumes or narrow to one VM. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance versus get_block_storage_volume, list_block_storage_snapshots, or the cost-estimate siblings, and no note on when to paginate.

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