pbs_datastore_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool is read-only and returns three specific metrics. It does not disclose potential side effects (none expected), permissions, or rate limits, but for a status tool this is minimally adequate.

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 three sentences: purpose, return values, and alternatives. It is front-loaded with the key action and contains no fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not detail return values. It covers the tool's purpose, what it returns, and relates to sibling tools. Minor gap: does not mention the optional 'proximo_target' parameter, but overall sufficient for a single-datastore status 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description implicitly references the 'store' parameter but does not add extra meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain the optional 'proximo_target' parameter, which could be relevant for multi-target setups.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'runtime usage statistics for one PBS datastore'. It explicitly marks the tool as read-only, distinguishing it from sibling tools like pbs_datastores_list (enumeration) and pbs_gc_status (garbage-collection state).

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 clearly states when to use this tool (to get usage statistics for a single datastore) and provides alternative tools for enumeration and GC state. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the context is clear.

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