linux_disk_usage_calculator

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint. The description adds 'offline' and 'rate-limited (30 requests/minute for anonymous callers)', plus 'Operates only on the numbers and text you supply', which provides additional behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 relatively long but well-organized: starts with overall purpose, lists operations, then constraints and alternatives. It could be slightly more concise, but every sentence adds value and the structure is logical.

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 complexity of six operations with nested parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers all necessary context: what each operation does, parameter requirements, constraints, and integration with other tools. It feels complete for an AI agent's needs.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context like 'Auto-detects human (du -h) vs raw-byte columns' for the 'text' parameter and 'May be supplied as this nested object or as top-level fields alongside operation' for 'input', which adds value beyond the schema.

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 it's a 'Linux Disk Usage And RAID Calculator' and enumerates six specific operations with brief explanations. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'file_file_size_calculator' and 'math_unit_converter' by naming them explicitly.

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 clear when-to-use guidance for each operation and includes an explicit alternative: 'use file_file_size_calculator for byte-unit conversion plus transfer-time estimates, or math_unit_converter for general unit conversion'. It also clarifies constraints like 'never reading a real filesystem'.

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