Update disk

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds context: requires active service, PATCH endpoint, resize constraint. However, it does not disclose error conditions, partial update behavior, or side effects, especially given openWorldHint=true.

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 concise (3 sentences + API endpoint) and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description leaves gaps: it does not explain return values, error scenarios, or whether updates to name/mountPath have constraints. The openWorldHint suggests undocumented side effects. More detail is needed for a mutation 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 low (25%). The description adds specific meaning for sizeGB (resize constraint) and implies diskId usage. Name and mountPath remain unexplained. The added information is useful but insufficient to fully compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 it updates a persistent disk by ID, matching the tool name and title. It specifies the verb 'update' and the resource 'disk', and distinguishes well from sibling tools like render_add_disk or render_delete_disk.

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 a crucial prerequisite: the associated service must be deployed and active. It also includes a specific constraint for resizing (new size > current). However, it does not offer exclusions or compare to alternative operations, which limits guidance.

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