move_container_volume

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and lists parameters without detailing side effects, authorization needs, or operational constraints (e.g., whether the container must be stopped).

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: a single-sentence summary followed by a clean list of parameters. Every word earns its place, no redundancy.

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?

The description covers parameter semantics adequately but lacks operational context such as container state requirements, potential downtime, or result format. Given the presence of an output schema, return values need not be explained, but the description could be more complete for a data-moving operation.

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 adds meaningful explanations for all 7 parameters, including examples for volume (e.g., 'rootfs', 'mp0') and clarification of delete_original. This substantially compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 moves a container volume to different storage or to another container, providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like move_vm_disk or migrate_container due to the explicit mention of container volume.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, container state requirements, or comparison with similar tools like migrate_container or move_vm_disk.

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