portainer_docker_disk_usage

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

The description indicates a read-only operation ('Get'), which is inferred. No behavioral traits such as authorization requirements, rate limits, or side effects are disclosed. Without annotations, the description provides minimal transparency beyond the basic read nature.

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 extremely concise: one line for purpose and one line for parameter. Every word serves a purpose, and the essential information is front-loaded. No redundancy or filler.

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 disk usage query, the description covers the what and the parameter. Since an output schema exists, return values are not required. The only minor gap is the lack of explanation about the output structure or behavior when endpoint_id is invalid, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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, endpoint_id, is fully explained: it's optional and defaults to the user's default endpoint if omitted. The schema provides no description (0% coverage), so the description compensates completely, adding clarity that the agent would otherwise lack.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: getting Docker disk usage including containers, images, volumes, and build cache. The verb 'Get' and specific resource list make it unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like portainer_container_stats or portainer_docker_info.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, fallbacks, or exclusions. Sibling tools with overlapping functionality (e.g., portainer_docker_info) are not differentiated.

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