asuswrt_partitions

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

The description implies a read-only inspection ('inspect') but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it is adequate but minimal.

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, direct sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could hint at the return format (e.g., list of partitions) but is otherwise sufficient.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to add meaning. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as the schema fully covers the input.

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 action ('inspect'), the resource ('block-device partitions'), and the source ('reported by the router kernel'). It is specific and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools that deal with storage at a different level (e.g., mounts, usage).

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like asuswrt_mounts or asuswrt_storage_usage. The description does not provide context for when partition inspection is appropriate.

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