pve_list_storage

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 one genuinely new behavioral fact — capacity usage is only included when node is supplied — but says nothing about behavior on an invalid node (error vs. empty) or about scope when node is omitted.

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 with no wasted words; the primary purpose comes first and the conditional detail second. It is efficient, though given the empty schema descriptions it could afford one more short clause without becoming verbose.

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-value structure needn't be described, and the read-only annotation covers the mutation question. For a one-optional-parameter list tool the description is nearly sufficient, with only the omission behavior and node format left implicit.

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 coverage is 0% and the lone node parameter has no description at all, so the sentence "when node is known, include capacity usage on that node" is the only thing explaining what the parameter actually changes. It stops short of specifying accepted node formats (name vs. ID), which keeps it off a 5.

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?

"List storage definitions" is a specific verb+resource, and the storage domain is clearly distinct from siblings such as pve_list_nodes, pve_list_isos and pve_list_vms. It doesn't explicitly contrast itself with any sibling, so it lands just below the top band.

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 clause "when node is known" implies a usage condition for the optional parameter, but there is no guidance on when to omit it, what happens if node is omitted, or which alternative to reach for when storage isn't the target. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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