List Physical Disks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds valuable context about temperature readings being cached ~5 minutes by TrueNAS, which is a behavioral trait beyond the annotation. This helps the agent understand potential staleness of temperature data.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then details the returned fields and optional temperature. No wasted words; every clause adds value.

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 low complexity, the presence of an output schema, and the readOnlyHint annotation, the description is sufficient for the agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers output contents, optional parameters, and the caching caveat, making it complete for this context.

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 fully describes both parameters (response_format and include_temperatures) with descriptions and defaults, achieving 100% schema coverage. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'physical disks' and enumerates the exact attributes returned (model, serial number, size, type, pool, optional temperature). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like truenas_list_pools, which list pools rather than disks.

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 implies usage for retrieving physical disk inventory, including optional temperature readings. It does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or exclude any scenarios, but the context is clear from the tool name and description. Score 4 for clear implied usage without explicit exclusions.

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