get_r_asset_asset_storages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It correctly conveys that this is a GET (read-only) operation and hints at pagination and required headers, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, filter syntax, or potential errors. The presence of an output schema partially excuses missing return-value details.

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?

Two sentences with no redundancy. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the parameter routing instruction is compact and directly useful.

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?

For a straightforward GET with an output schema, the description covers the operation and parameter placement. However, it omits sibling selection guidance and doesn't specify required path parameters or concrete filter keys, leaving an agent to infer details that may be necessary for correct invocation.

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 0%, but the description compensates by explicitly explaining the role of three key parameters: path_params (route IDs), query (filters and pagination), and headers (required request headers). This adds meaningful semantics beyond the bare property names, even though the body parameter is left unmentioned.

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 states the verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'asset storages' and includes the exact API path. It clearly identifies a collection-level operation, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from the singular sibling get_r_asset_asset_storages_id, leaving that distinction to the plural name.

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 gives parameter placement guidance (route IDs in path_params, filters/pagination in query, headers in headers) but provides no instructions on when to prefer this tool over alternatives, such as the singular get_r_asset_asset_storages_id, and no explicit exclusions or conditions.

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