compare_storage_inventory

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

With no annotations, the description transparently explains the matching algorithm (cheapest SKU by disk_type), pricing formula, output structure, and limitations (IOPS/throughput/snapshots accepted but not fully priced).

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value: bulk-compare, pricing logic, output, and limitations.

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?

The description covers input, logic, output, and limitations adequately for a v0.2 tool without annotations or output schema. Minor gaps exist (e.g., handling of tier/group fields) but overall 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?

The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining how disk_type, capacity_gb, and quantity are used for pricing, and that IOPS/throughput are metadata. It compensates for the 0% schema description coverage by clarifying key fields.

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 tool bulk-compares storage volumes across three clouds, picks cheapest SKU by disk_type, and returns pricing. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like compare_compute_inventory by focusing on storage.

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 use for comparing storage costs across clouds but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid it compared to alternatives like compare_clouds or get_individual cloud pricing tools.

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