proxmox_ceph_osd

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks behavioral details. It does not disclose that 'delete' is a destructive operation, nor does it mention any side effects, authorization needs, or return values. The term 'Manage' is vague and insufficient for an agent to understand safety implications.

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 that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the key information, making it easy to scan.

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 9 parameters (though many optional), no output schema, and can perform destructive actions (delete), the description is incomplete. It provides no information on return values, error behavior, or operational context like when deletion is allowed. For a management tool with such capabilities, more context 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 89%, meaning most parameters are already described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond listing actions in parentheses. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb 'Manage' and the resource 'Ceph OSDs', listing the specific actions (list, create, delete). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like proxmox_ceph_mon or proxmox_ceph_pool, which manage different Ceph components.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools cover other Ceph entities, so usage is implied, but there is no mention of prerequisites or conditions for each action (e.g., when to create vs delete).

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