proxmox_storage_content

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It mentions actions like delete and prune which are destructive, but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or whether actions are idempotent. This is insufficient for safe agent usage.

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 sentence listing actions, which is highly concise and front-loaded. Every word adds value; no waste.

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?

Despite high schema coverage, the description fails to explain the tool's overall behavior, such as how actions map to parameters (e.g., upload requires filename and url), expected outputs, or error handling. With 20 parameters and no output schema, 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?

With 95% schema coverage, the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond listing action types, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding of parameter relationships (e.g., which params are required for which action).

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 tool manages storage content and lists specific actions (list, upload, delete, etc.). This is a strong verb-resource pairing, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like proxmox_storage_config, though the actions list implies a different scope.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It merely lists actions without explaining which action to choose under different circumstances, or when this tool is preferred over other storage-related tools.

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