roboshadow_get_disk_shares

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation and discloses the kind of output ('share path and access details'), but provides no additional behavioral context such as output format, potential failure modes, or whether any special permissions are required.

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 two short sentences with no redundant wording. It front-loads the primary action and scope, then adds the most relevant output information without wasting space.

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 list operation with three well-documented required parameters, the description covers what the tool returns ('share path and access details') and the precise scope. Although there is no output schema, the description supplies enough information for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly; only richer output-shape detail is absent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented in the input schema. The description does not need to explain individual parameters, and while it adds contextual scope ('one disk of one device') but no parameter-specific semantics beyond that, the schema coverage baseline of 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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('network shares'), and narrows the scope precisely to one disk of one device. It also states what is included in the result ('share path and access details'), making the tool's purpose clear and distinct from broader disk/report siblings.

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 phrase 'on one disk of one device' gives useful context for when this tool is appropriate, especially among many disk-related sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention any alternative tool, leaving usage guidance implied rather than explicit.

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