storage_status

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

With no annotations, the description must convey the tool's behavior. The verb 'fetch' indicates a read-only operation, and the description lists the returned data (capacity, total/used bytes, detailed status), which clarifies what the tool does. It doesn't discuss error handling or permissions, but for a simple status read this is adequate.

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 extraneous words. It states verb, resource, scope, and data fields 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 low-complexity tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers the resource, the node scope, and the key data fields returned. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke it without needing additional explanation.

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 no descriptions, so the description compensates by mapping 'node' and 'storage' to 'on a node' and 'storage pool'. This adds semantic meaning beyond the bare parameter names, clarifying the roles of both required parameters.

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 tool fetches capacity, total/used bytes, and detailed status for a specific storage pool on a node. It uses a specific verb (fetch) and resource (storage pool on a node), and is distinct from sibling tools like storage_content or list_storage.

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 conveys when to use the tool by specifying what data it retrieves, but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. Context signals and sibling list imply it is for per-pool status queries, so it has clear context though not explicit alternatives.

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