oracle_linux_storage_io_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention that the tool is likely read-only, has no side effects, or what happens if the target is invalid. This is a significant gap for transparency.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the key information. It lists the resource and specific metrics concisely with no wasted words.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description provides a reasonable overview. However, it omits details such as the return format or whether the data is real-time, but these are minor gaps for a monitoring tool.

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 input schema description already covers the single parameter 'target' (Target name from ~/.dbx/targets/). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 'Block device I/O statistics' and lists specific metrics (reads/writes per second, throughput, await, utilization). It distinguishes itself from siblings like oracle_linux_storage_df (disk usage) and oracle_linux_storage_lvm_list (LVM info) by focusing on I/O performance.

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 implies usage for obtaining I/O statistics but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or context on when not to use it are provided, so guidance is only implied.

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