create_mount

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

Discloses key behaviors: adds mount, applies on next deploy, requires confirmation for sensitive bind paths. Without annotations, description carries burden; could mention whether existing mounts are overwritten or if side effects exist.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the core purpose and type distinction, with no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers essential aspects: purpose, type choices, deployment timing, and sensitive path confirmation. No output schema, but acceptable. Could add details on validation or error handling.

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 coverage is 100%, so description adds minimal parameter-level insight beyond what schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate; description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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?

Description explicitly states the tool creates a mount for a service to persist data, distinguishes between volume and bind types, and mentions deployment timing. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools focused on other resources like ports or databases.

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?

Provides clear guidance on when to use volume vs bind based on managed vs host path needs. Lacks explicit exclusions or comparison to alternatives like updating mounts, but the context is sufficient for common use.

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