pbs_tape_drive_load_slot

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is a mutation, risk medium, real robotic action, dry-run default, synchronous execution, returns null (unlike other load ops), no undo primitive, reverse action via unload. This is highly transparent.

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 concise with three sentences, front-loaded with the mutation label and key risk. Every sentence adds value: purpose, dry-run behavior, return type, reverse action, config prerequisite. 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 complexity (robotic action, side effects), the description covers purpose, behavior, parameters, effects, prerequisites, dry-run, no undo, and reverse operation. Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Complete guidance for an 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%, so the schema already describes all four parameters. The description adds context for confirm (false=plan, true=execute) and mentions the need for PROXIMO_PBS_* config but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema for other parameters.

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 it mounts a cartridge from source_slot into a drive, specifying the action (MUTATION: mount) and the resource. It distinguishes itself from pbs_tape_drive_load_media by noting the same physical effect but different return type and dry-run behavior.

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 explains dry-run by default (returns PLAN) and confirm=True for execution. It mentions the need for PROXIMO_PBS_* config and that reversal is done with pbs_tape_drive_unload. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over pbs_tape_drive_load_media, only noting the identical physical effect.

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