tenki_resize_volume

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, covering the write and non-destructive nature. The description adds the critical behavioral constraint that volumes can only grow, not shrink, which is not in the annotations. It also gives the exact size range, providing useful context beyond the structured metadata.

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 two sentences with zero fluff. The action and primary constraint are front-loaded in the first sentence, and the size range is stated efficiently. It is an exemplary model of conciseness for a simple tool.

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?

For a two-parameter mutation tool with annotations covering safety, the description provides the essential behavioral constraint (grow-only) and the size range. It does not explain prerequisites like volume state or synchronous behavior, but these are not critical for basic usage. It is largely complete for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, with both volume_id and size_bytes fully described including the size range. The description repeats the range in prose but adds no new semantic information. Since the schema carries the full parameter documentation, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action: 'Grow a volume to a new size in bytes' – a specific verb and resource. It also includes the size range and the explicit constraint 'Volumes can grow but not shrink,' which precisely defines the operation and distinguishes it from any shrink behavior. This leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 when to use it: when you need to increase a volume's size. It also gives a clear when-not condition with 'can grow but not shrink,' indicating it should not be used for shrinking. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools like tenki_update_volume for other volume property changes, so it lacks routing to siblings.

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