roboshadow_get_disk_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation ('Get') and lists the return contents, which is helpful. However, it does not disclose any error handling, authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the response is paginated. For a simple summary tool this is acceptable, but it leaves some behavioral aspects uncovered.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the resource and scope ('organisation-wide disk-usage summary') and then lists the key components. No extraneous words, and it conveys all necessary information efficiently.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it states what the summary contains and its scope. It does not mention potential error scenarios or the exact response format, but these are not critical for a simple read-only summary. The description covers the essential context an agent needs to decide when to call it and what to expect.

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 already fully describes the single parameter (organisationId) with a description including how to discover it. The tool description adds no additional meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides. With 100% schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves an organisation-wide disk-usage summary and enumerates the specific data points it includes (low-disk-space devices, unencrypted devices, shared-folder and USB-disk counts). The verb 'Get' plus the resource scope and explicit contents make it distinct from sibling tools like roboshadow_get_disk_report_by_device or roboshadow_get_disk_shares.

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 usage for a high-level organisation-wide overview by saying 'organisation-wide', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as roboshadow_get_disk_report for per-device details. No alternative tools are named or exclusions given, so the guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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