Create Virtual_disk

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds context about creating a new row and the response format option, and cautions about dry-run. No contradictions, and it adds value beyond annotations.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences plus a Returns section. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and includes a critical usage note. No wasted words.

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 7 parameters (3 required) and nested objects, the description covers the creation action, dry-run caution, and output options. It lacks detail on custom_fields or prerequisites, but the schema fills most gaps. Reasonably complete.

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 86% (high), so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning, such as 'size in MB' and the response_format options. It does not significantly enhance understanding of parameters beyond the schema.

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 'Create a new virtual_disk in NetBox' and mentions it adds a new row. The verb and resource are specific, but it does not explicitly differentiate from other create tools; however, the name and context suffice.

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 includes a guideline to ask before calling if a dry-run is wanted, which implies cautious usage. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance versus alternatives like update or get.

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