linode_list_volumes

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation, adding that it returns specific attributes. However, no additional behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, sorting, rate limits) are disclosed beyond what annotations already indicate.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately states the action and output. No wasted words; it is appropriately concise.

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 simplicity of the tool (list with one optional parameter and an output schema), the description adequately covers the primary functionality. Some details about pagination or the detail parameter could improve completeness, but it meets basic needs.

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?

The description does not explain the 'detail' parameter or its effect on output, despite the schema having 0% coverage. The parameter is optional, but its meaning (concise vs full) is left entirely to the schema, which is insufficient.

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 'List the block storage volumes in the account' with specific output fields (size, region, status, attached instance), making the purpose unambiguous and distinguishing it from sibling tools that list other resources.

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 implies usage for listing volumes, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., filtering, singular get), nor does it provide exclusions or context. However, the sibling tool list clarifies it's a general list operation.

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