pve_get_storage_content

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It accurately states the action but adds no additional behavioral context such as whether it is read-only, requires specific permissions, or returns a summary or detailed listing. It is not misleading, but minimal.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the purpose and includes the key content types. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple, an output schema exists, and the description covers the core action. It would be slightly more complete if it referenced the content_type filter or the default 'all', but the schema covers those details, so the description is sufficient for a straightforward listing 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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to 'content_type' by listing examples (images, ISOs, backups, templates) that map to enum values. However, 'node' and 'storage' are not elaborated, and the default behavior of 'all' is not mentioned.

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 a specific verb 'List content of a storage pool' and enumerates content types (VM images, ISOs, backups, templates), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like pve_get_storage which likely retrieves storage configuration rather than contents.

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 its usage (when you need to list storage contents) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state exclusions. No guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from pve_get_storage or pve_list_vms is provided.

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