GetDiskUsedData

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it 'gets' data (implying a read operation) but doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns real-time vs historical data, or what format the output takes. For a data retrieval tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence in Chinese that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential 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 complexity of cloud monitoring tools, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the returned data looks like (e.g., metrics format, time ranges, units), authentication requirements, or how it differs from similar sibling tools like GetDiskUsageData.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters (InstanceIds and RegionId) clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, so it meets the baseline for adequate but not exceptional coverage.

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 verb ('获取' meaning 'get') and resource ('磁盘分区使用量指标数据' meaning 'disk partition usage metric data'), making the purpose understandable. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like GetDiskTotalData or GetDiskUsageData, but the specific focus on 'used data' provides some implicit differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like GetDiskTotalData or GetDiskUsageData. There's no mention of prerequisites, context, or comparison with sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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