volume_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states 'List all volumes' indicating a read operation with no destructive intent. However, it omits details such as pagination, authentication requirements, or any rate limits, which would be valuable for behavioral understanding.

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 extremely concise, using bullet points and arrows to organize information. It front-loads the core purpose and then provides structured guidance without any 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?

The tool has a single parameter and no output schema. The description explains the purpose well but does not describe the return format, fields, or any pagination behavior. Given the simplicity, it is adequate but lacks completeness regarding output details.

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 has 100% description coverage for the single parameter projectId. The description does not add any additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List all volumes in a project' with specific verb and resource. It further clarifies use cases with bullet points for viewing configurations, managing data volumes, and auditing storage usage, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like volume_create, volume_delete, and volume_update.

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 when-to-use guidance via the 'Best for' section and includes prerequisites (project_list) and next steps (volume_create). Although it does not explicitly state when not to use it, the context is sufficient for an agent to understand appropriate usage.

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