Список дисков сервера

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

The description implies a read-only operation by saying 'Возвращает список' (returns a list), but the annotations set readOnlyHint=false. This directly contradicts the structured hint, undermining confidence in the tool's safety profile. No additional behavioral details like pagination or side effects are disclosed.

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 consists of two efficient sentences: the first states the core purpose and return fields, the second gives usage context. There is no fluff and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields (ID, size, load, status). For a simple one-parameter list tool, this is fairly complete, though it lacks details like pagination or response format examples.

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% with server_id described as 'ОБЯЗАТЕЛЬНОЕ ПОЛЕ - ID сервера' (REQUIRED FIELD - server ID). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 'Возвращает список дисков сервера' (Returns a list of server disks) with specific fields (ID, size, load, status), making the verb and resource clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning its use before backup operations.

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 says 'Используй перед операциями с бэкапами' (Use before backup operations) and names the specific sibling tools requiring disk_id (list_server_disk_backups and create_server_disk_backup), providing clear when-to-use guidance and alternatives.

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