proxmox_node_disk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states 'Query node disk information' and lists actions, implying read-only operations, but does not disclose performance implications, safety (e.g., whether SMART checks are destructive), or any side effects. The lack of detail is a significant gap.

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—one sentence plus a list—with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the purpose, making it efficient for quick scanning.

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's complexity (7 parameters, 2 required, no output schema), the description is far too sparse. It does not explain return values, how different actions work, or how to effectively use parameters like disk or type. For a multi-action node disk query tool, this is inadequate.

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 86%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description repeats the action enum values, adding no new meaning. It does not explain relationships between parameters (e.g., disk requirement for smart action). Thus, the description adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 'Query node disk information' and lists the possible actions (list, smart, lvm, etc.), specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'proxmox_node_disk_admin', which likely handles administrative operations, leaving some ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative disk-related tools (e.g., proxmox_node_disk_admin, proxmox_vm_disk). It does not specify prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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