whodb_platform_storage_usage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the unit (bytes) and emphasizing that workspace targeting is per-call and does not alter defaults.

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 two tightly written sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose and the per-call targeting behavior are both front-loaded and easy for an agent to parse.

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 read-only inspection tool with rich schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, return unit, and targeting behavior. It could mention default resolution more explicitly, but overall it provides enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly, including the workspace fallback behavior. The description repeats the workspace targeting concept but adds little beyond what the schema already states, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Return selected hosted project storage usage in bytes.' It is immediately clear what the tool retrieves, but it does not distinguish itself from any sibling tools or clarify how 'selected' is determined beyond the workspace parameter.

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 gives implied usage by stating the tool returns storage usage, and it explains how the workspace object can be used for per-call targeting without changing defaults. However, it does not say when to use this tool versus alternatives like project_health or workspace_summary.

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