storage_usage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool effectively runs `df` on /data and /sdcard, which signals a non-destructive read operation and the exact scope. It does not explicitly say 'read-only' or mention authorization, but the command reference makes the behavior clear.

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 short sentence with no filler, and the key facts (internal storage, /data, /sdcard) are front-loaded. It would benefit from a mention of the serial parameter, but for its length it is well structured.

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?

For a simple status query, the core purpose and scope are specified, and an output schema exists to describe results. However, the optional serial parameter is undocumented and there is no usage direction, leaving a noticeable gap for correct invocation.

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 schema has one optional parameter (`serial`) with zero description coverage, and the tool description never mentions it. The name 'serial' is partially self-explanatory as a device selector, but no guidance is given on valid values, where to get them, or what omitting it means.

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 Hungarian description, translating to 'Internal storage usage (df /data, /sdcard)', names the metric and the target filesystems. This is specific and distinguishable from file-listing or other status tools, but it lacks an explicit verb phrase like 'Get' or 'Report'.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is given; use is implied by the phrase 'internal storage usage'. There are no exclusions or references to sibling tools, so the agent must infer that this is the right tool for checking free space on /data and /sdcard.

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