oracle_linux_storage_asm_devices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure. It only lists output fields but does not mention that the tool is read-only, has no side effects, or any prerequisites like ASM instance being up. This is insufficient for safe agent invocation.

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 one sentence long, front-loaded with the key noun phrase 'ASM candidate and active disk devices', and contains no redundant words. It earns its brevity.

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 list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately outlines the returned fields. It lacks only minor details like ordering or a note that it is a read operation, but it is largely sufficient.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'target', whose description is provided in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, such as format, constraints, or how to find targets.

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 it returns ASM candidate and active disk devices with specific fields (path, size, header status, diskgroup membership). It distinguishes it from sibling storage tools like df, io_stats, and lvm_list, though it does not explicitly use a verb like 'list' or 'show'.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description only states what it returns, leaving the agent to infer its purpose relative to sibling tools like oracle_linux_storage_df or oracle_linux_storage_lvm_list.

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