volume-list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that it lists objects and data-blocks but does not clarify whether this is a read-only operation, what data is returned, or whether it has any side effects. It implies a non-destructive action but fails to explicitly state that.

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, concise sentence that exactly conveys the tool's purpose without any extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficient, earning a high score for conciseness.

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 tool's simplicity (no params, no output schema), the description is minimal but lacks context about what 'volume objects and data-blocks' means in the broader domain. It does not clarify the return format or how this list might be used, which could leave an agent uncertain about the output's nature.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema confirms this, so the description need not explain parameter semantics. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description accurately reflects the parameterless nature. No additional parameter information is needed.

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 'List volume objects and data-blocks' clearly identifies the action (list) and the resource (volume objects and data-blocks), and it is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like volume-create_empty and volume-import. It is concise and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or when a user might prefer volume-report or volume-set instead. There is no context about listing vs. reporting volume data.

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