ssh_disk_file_usage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The description only states 'check' which implies a read operation, but does not explicitly confirm it is non-destructive, mention permissions, or describe any other behavioral traits.

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 extremely concise, using a single sentence plus a two-parameter list. The purpose is stated upfront with the equivalent command 'du -sh', making it immediately understandable.

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?

Although the tool has an output schema, the description does not mention what it returns (e.g., disk usage value, human-readable format). The description is adequate for a simple check but lacks detail on output and differentiation from similar sibling tools.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It repeats the parameter names with minimal elaboration: 'path: Path to check' and 'session_name: SSH session to use'. This adds slight clarification beyond the schema titles but is insufficient to fully compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Check disk usage of a file or directory (du -sh)', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling 'ssh_disk_usage' presumably by focusing on a single file/dir rather than overall disk usage, but does not explicitly make this distinction.

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 'ssh_disk_usage'. It does not specify when it is appropriate or inappropriate, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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