mount_directory

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

No annotations provided, so the description must reveal behavioral traits. It lists parameters but does not mention side effects, required permissions, or whether the operation is reversible. The impact on the instance is not described.

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 front-loaded with a one-line summary followed by a concise bulleted list of parameters. No redundant information. Could be slightly more concise by removing 'Args:' header.

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?

Covers all parameters adequately but lacks behavioral context (e.g., mount persistence, effect on instance). With no annotations, more completeness would be beneficial. Output schema exists but is not described.

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 0%, but the description provides clear meanings for all six parameters (source, instance, target, uid_map, gid_map, mount_type). It adds value beyond the schema by explaining each parameter's role.

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 'Mount a local directory inside a Multipass instance,' specifying the action, resource, and target. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'umount_directory' and 'transfer_file.'

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., transfer_file) or prerequisites (e.g., instance must be running). Usage is implied but not clarified.

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