pve_list_isos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful conditional that `node` is required for node-scoped storages, but says nothing about permissions, error conditions, or what the listing contains (output schema covers returns).

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 sentence with no filler, and the key conditional constraint is packed inline rather than buried. Slight under-specification rather than verbosity, which is the better failure mode here.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be described, and with only two parameters the surface area is small. Still, an agent must guess at `storage` identifier format and at which node/storage combinations are valid, which the description could have closed cheaply.

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%, so the description must compensate. It meaningfully explains `node` as conditional on node-scoped storage, but leaves `storage` (the only required parameter) entirely unclarified — no format, ID vs name, or scoping hint.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List ISO images available on a storage"), which is a distinct operation from sibling list tools like pve_list_storage or pve_list_templates. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling to contrast with, so the differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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 parenthetical conveys a conditional usage rule — supply `node` when the storage is node-scoped — which is real guidance. However, there is no statement of when to prefer this tool over pve_list_storage or pve_list_templates, and no mention of prerequisites such as storage needing to be ISO-capable.

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