volume_inspect

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds beyond this by detailing returned fields (Name, Driver, Mountpoint, etc.) and noting that volumes have no separate id, which is a key behavioral detail.

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?

Description is four sentences with clear structure: statement of purpose, usage guidance, addressing clarification, and args/returns breakdown. No unnecessary information.

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 tool's simplicity (1 param, no output schema, read-only), the description is largely complete: it states what it does, when to use, and what it returns. Could optionally mention error behavior for missing volumes, but not essential.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains the single parameter `name` with context: 'The volume name (volumes have no ids)' and 'volumes are addressed purely by name; they have no separate id.' This adds meaning beyond the schema type.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get a volume's full inspect payload by name.' It specifies the verb (Get) and resource (volume's full inspect payload), and distinguishes from sibling volume_list by suggesting usage after it.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use it after `volume_list` to see a volume's on-disk location, driver, and labels — e.g. before a backup or `volume_remove`.' This provides concrete usage context and scenarios.

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