pbs_datastore_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so safety is clear. The description adds that it returns bytes information, but no further behavioral context such as authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. This is adequate but not enriched beyond the 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 a single sentence, directly front-loaded with the key output metrics. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant information.

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?

Given the tool is a simple read-only status check with good annotations and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any context about when to use it versus pbs_list_datastores or pbs_gc_status, and it does not mention how the datastore parameter relates to the default datastore, which the schema does cover but the description could reinforce.

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?

With schema_description_coverage at 0%, the description carries the burden of explaining parameters, but it does not mention the 'datastore' parameter at all. The only hint is 'one datastore,' which is too vague to help an agent understand how to provide the parameter or that omitting it uses a default.

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 what the tool returns: 'Total / used / available bytes for one datastore.' This is specific about the resource (datastore) and the metrics, distinguishing it from sibling tools like pbs_list_datastores which likely just list available datastores.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description simply states what it does without any context about selecting a datastore or when this status check is appropriate.

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