scan_disk

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

With no annotations, the description fully compensates by detailing the steps: locating WizTree CLI, running it, streaming CSV into SQLite (memory-efficient), and returning a summary. It also mentions optional treemap generation and timeout handling.

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 well-structured with a summary, step list, args table, and returns section. It is front-loaded with the purpose, but the step list could be slightly more concise; however, it remains clear and well-organized.

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 tool's complexity (7 parameters, external dependency, file I/O), the description covers the process, parameter usage, and return value. The output description is somewhat generic ('JSON string with scan result summary') but sufficient. No output schema provided.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description has an 'Args:' section explaining each parameter in detail, including usage advice like max_depth defaults and treemap generation. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 it scans a drive/folder with WizTree and imports results into the database. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by noting that after scanning, other tools should be used for querying.

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 explicitly calls it the 'primary data ingestion tool' and advises using other tools for querying afterward. It also provides practical advice, e.g., using a small max_depth for quick scans.

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