oracle_linux_storage_df

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

No annotations provided. Description implies a read-only operation (disk usage) but does not explicitly state safety, side effects, or permissions needed. Acceptable for a simple read tool but lacks depth.

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?

Description is brief and front-loaded with the tool's purpose, but could add a sentence about usage context or output format without being verbose.

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?

Given no output schema, the description lists the fields returned (mount point, size, etc.), which is helpful. For a simple df tool, it is fairly complete, though including a note on units or typical output would improve it.

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% and the single parameter 'target' has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states it provides filesystem disk usage (df) and lists the attributes (mount point, size, used, available, percent, filesystem type), distinguishing it from sibling storage tools like ASM devices and LVM.

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 versus alternatives such as oracle_linux_storage_lvm_list. The description only explains what it does, not when it is appropriate.

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