get_volume_usage

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

With no annotations, the description should explicitly disclose behavioral traits (e.g., read-only, non-destructive). While 'Get disk usage' implies a safe read operation, it does not confirm idempotency or lack of side effects. No prerequisites or limitations are mentioned.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise but overly minimal. It lacks critical information, making it more under-specified than efficiently concise.

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 complexity of 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to provide a complete picture. It omits return value structure, parameter meaning, and usage context, leaving the agent with insufficient information for correct invocation.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description adds no explanation for any of the three parameters. 'name' is somewhat obvious, but 'env_id' and 'agent_token' are completely unexplained, leaving the agent without guidance on how to set them.

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 ('Get disk usage') and the target resource ('a specific volume'). However, it does not differentiate the tool from similar siblings like 'get_volume_sizes', which could cause confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of use cases or conditions that would make this tool preferable over 'inspect_volume' or 'get_volume_sizes'.

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