put_storage_partition_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It lists error codes, which is helpful. However, it does not disclose side effects (e.g., data loss, unmounting requirements) or permissions needed. The mutation nature is implied but not detailed.

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 phrase plus error codes). It is concise but lacks structure and front-loading. The error codes are listed, but the main action is not elaborated. Could be improved with a brief sentence on behavior.

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 mutation tool with output schema, the description fails to clarify success/failure response or state changes. No mention of relationship to get_storage_partition_id or other storage tools. Error codes partially compensate, but overall incomplete.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters at all. The 'id' is clear from the name, but the 'body' parameter (additionalProperties: true) is completely unspecified. The agent has no guidance on what properties to include (e.g., enabled).

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 'Enable/Disable a partition', specifying the verb and resource. The tool name and sibling tools confirm it operates on a specific partition by ID. However, it could be more precise about what 'enable/disable' means (e.g., mounting state).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like put_storage_partition_id_check. No prerequisites (e.g., disk must be present) or exclusions provided. The description lacks any usage context.

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