update_storage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates mutation via 'update' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as error handling, idempotency, required permissions, or side effects beyond listing parameters.

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 paragraph with a clear list for parameters. It is mostly concise and front-loaded with the purpose, though the parameter list is verbose but necessary given low schema coverage.

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 7 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema shown, the description is incomplete. It lacks return value details, error handling, examples, and broader usage context for a complex update tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds brief context for each parameter (e.g., 'delete: Comma-separated list of settings to delete'), which adds some value, but does not explain formats, constraints, or relationships. Baseline 3 due to low coverage, but not fully compensating.

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 'Update an existing storage pool configuration,' which specifies the verb (update) and resource (storage pool). It implicitly distinguishes from create and delete siblings.

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 implies usage for updating existing storage but does not provide explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tools. No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned.

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