get_smartd_health

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

Without annotations, the description clearly discloses behavioral traits: requires sudo, returns error if smartctl not installed or sudo not permitted, and outlines return fields. It provides enough context for safe invocation.

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 front-loaded with the action, uses multiple sentences efficiently, and each sentence adds value. Slightly verbose but well-structured.

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 a single parameter and an existing output schema (though not provided), the description covers prerequisites, return fields, and error conditions. It is sufficiently complete for a simple health check 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?

The only parameter 'device' has a default and examples of valid values (nvme0n1, sda) in the description, adding meaning beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 0% but the description compensates well.

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's purpose: 'Query SMART health for a storage device via smartctl.' It gives specific examples of devices and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_system_health' by focusing on SMART data.

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 does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the default device and sudo requirements, but lacks guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tool might be more appropriate.

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