pbs_tape_drive_inventory

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

Discloses side effects (updates PBS media online-status bookkeeping) and notes it is a GET with no confirm gate. Adversarial warning about physical label-text is provided, though annotations are absent.

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 concise and front-loaded with key points (READ-ONLY, main action). However, some jargon (ADVERSARIAL, no confirm gate) may reduce clarity for some agents.

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?

Covers main behavior, side effect, and config requirement. The presence of an output schema reduces need to describe return values. Missing detailed guidance on adversarial scenario but overall adequate.

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 adds the note 'Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config' which relates to the target parameter but does not otherwise enhance parameter semantics beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool is READ-ONLY and lists known media labels via the drive's associated changer, distinguishing it from sibling tools like pbs_tape_drive_status or pbs_tape_drive_catalog.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description mentions it updates bookkeeping but does not explain when to prefer this over other inventory-related siblings.

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