Создание сетевого диска

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

The description confirms the write nature of the operation, consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint=false). It adds the practical context of checking presets first, but doesn't elaborate on side effects, costs, or post-creation state of the drive. Given that annotations already cover the basic safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

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 sentences and gets straight to the point, stating the action first and then the prerequisite. No wasted words, easy 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?

The tool creates a resource but the description doesn't mention what the response contains, which is relevant since there is no output schema. It also doesn't note that the operation may incur costs or whether the drive requires mounting after creation. However, the core action and prerequisite are covered, making it minimally viable.

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 schema already provides descriptions for all four parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description echoes preset_id and size but adds no new parameter-specific details beyond what the schema states. It doesn't compensate with extra information about constraints or units beyond the 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 the tool creates a new network drive with a specified size and selected preset (preset_id), using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_network_drive, delete_network_drive, or list_network_drives.

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 provides explicit usage guidance by instructing the user to first retrieve available tariffs via list_network_drive_presets. This is a clear prerequisite, though it doesn't discuss exclusions or alternative creation paths since create is unique among the sibling tools.

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