Node Disks

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only behavior is covered. The description reinforces this with 'Query' but adds little beyond the annotation, such as permission requirements or output characteristics. It does not contradict the annotations, but it also does not meaningfully expand on them.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. The action list is useful but redundant with the schema enum, and the overall terseness means it does not waste words. It could use a little more structure without becoming long.

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?

With seven parameters and no output schema, this description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain how each action affects required or optional parameters, which parameters apply to which action, or what the tool returns. An agent would need additional context or external knowledge to invoke the tool correctly across all action modes.

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 itself documents most parameters. The description only repeats the action enum values without explaining their distinct meanings, disk requirements, or parameter interactions. This is acceptable for the baseline but does not add 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 uses the specific verb 'Query' and the resource 'node disk information', and enumerates the available action modes, making the tool's read-oriented purpose clear. It does not explicitly distinguish it from proxmox_node_disk_admin, but the 'information' framing plus the read-only annotation provides enough differentiation.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like proxmox_node_disk_admin or proxmox_vm_disk. The action list is present, but the description does not explain which action to choose for a given scenario or when this tool is the right sibling to call.

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