local_ydb_storage_leftovers

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

Annotations already mark it as read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds value by detailing what it scans (Docker volume names and profile.storageSearchPaths), confirming it deletes nothing, and noting its role as a precursor to cleanup.

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 concise and well-structured with three sentences: first defines purpose and scope, second describes scanning behavior and non-destructiveness, third gives usage context. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 simple read-only search tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, behavior, and usage sufficiently. It clearly explains what the tool does and how it fits with the sibling cleanup tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add further detail about parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 explicitly states it is a read-only search for candidate leftover Docker volumes, dumps, and PDisk/data paths, distinguishing it from the sibling cleanup tool by noting it deletes nothing.

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 clear usage guidance by stating 'use before local_ydb_cleanup_storage to decide exact paths or volumes to remove', indicating when to use it and implying when not to (i.e., when deletion is intended).

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