list_storage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the scope and output fields, but does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or mention any permissions or side effects. The verb 'list' implies non-mutating behavior, but it is not made explicit.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It conveys the action, object, optional filter, and output attributes efficiently.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequately complete. It covers purpose, filtering scope, and output contents. It does not discuss return format or pagination, but these are not necessary given the tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema.

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 sole parameter 'node' is not described in the schema (0% coverage), but the description explains its meaning: 'globally or for a specific node' implies the node parameter is an optional filter, and omitting it lists globally. This fully compensates for the missing schema description.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('storage pools'), and clarifies the scope ('globally or for a specific node') plus the included fields ('type, status, and calculated space usage'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like storage_content or storage_status.

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 gives context on when to use it (listing pools globally or per node) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. Sibling tools like storage_content and storage_status exist, but the description does not contrast with them, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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