get_node_storage_status

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not explicitly state that this is a read-only, non-destructive operation. While the name implies reading, the lack of explicit safety disclosure is a gap for agents assessing risk.

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 very short with no fluff; it gets straight to the point. However, it could benefit from a clearer structure (e.g., separating the main purpose from parameter descriptions).

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 output schema exists, the description covers the basic purpose. However, for a retrieval tool, it lacks details like what 'usage status' includes (e.g., units, formatting) and does not explain the parameters beyond minimal labels.

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?

The description adds minimal value beyond the input schema: it labels parameters as 'node name' and 'storage ID', but provides no additional semantics, constraints, examples, or guidance on valid values. With 0% schema coverage, this is insufficient.

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 retrieves usage status of a storage pool on a node, including total, used, and available. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_storage_config or get_node_disks.

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 vs alternatives such as get_storage_config or get_node_storage_scan. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or any contextual hints.

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