Storage Usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds context about the breakdown by apps, insights, and system, which is useful but does not disclose additional behavioral details like response format or units. This is comparable to the baseline in the calibration examples.

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, consisting of two short sentences that directly state the purpose and the key breakdown categories. Every word earns its place with no redundant or filler content.

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 low complexity (no params, no output schema) and the annotations that cover safety, the description is complete enough. It tells the agent what the tool does and what data it returns, which is sufficient for a simple read-only storage info tool.

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, so the input schema is trivially covered. According to the rules, the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it doesn't.

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 the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Get Homey storage usage breakdown.' It further distinguishes itself from siblings like get_memory_info and get_system_info by specifying that it covers apps, insights, and system disk space.

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 appropriate usage by focusing on storage breakdown, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives or exclude other tools. There is no direct guidance on choosing get_storage_info versus get_memory_info or get_system_info.

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