pbs_tape_drive_barcode_label_media

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden: discloses RISK_HIGH (prior content unaddressable), no built-in emptiness check, dry-run default, execution behavior, response format, no undo, and config requirements. Comprehensive and honest.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with 'MUTATION:', follows with risk, behavior, and response. Every sentence adds value. No fluff.

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 mutation tool with risk, output schema, and sibling differentiation, the description covers purpose, usage, risk, default behavior, confirmation, no undo, config requirement, and response format. Complete for an AI agent.

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% with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself is sufficient. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states 'MUTATION: label a drive's mounted media using barcodes read from the changer device' and distinguishes it from sibling pbs_tape_drive_label_media by noting the barcode source vs caller-supplied string. Specific verb and resource.

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?

Explicitly mentions dry-run by default, confirm=True for execution, and need for PROXIMO_PBS_* config. Compares to sibling tool (pbs_tape_drive_label_media) for when to use barcode vs custom label. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is clear.

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