volume.report

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies read-only behavior ('Report') but does not confirm side-effect-free operation, permissions, or changes to the volume. The term 'live' suggests current state, but it's not 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 one sentence of 8 words, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it could benefit from a slightly broader explanation of what is reported without being verbose.

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 no output schema and sparse annotations, the description should clarify what 'RNA properties' entails and what the agent can expect as output. It omits these details, leaving the agent to infer or rely on external knowledge.

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 only parameter, name_or_object, has a title in the schema but the description adds no meaning. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain how to identify the volume (e.g., name, path, object reference), but it does not.

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 'Report live RNA properties for a volume', which clearly indicates a read operation on a volume's live data. It differentiates from sibling tools like volume.list (which lists volumes) and volume.set (which modifies). However, 'RNA properties' may be jargon and lacks specificity about which properties are reported.

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 like volume.list, volume.set, or other report tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, nor when not to use it.

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