pbs_tape_drive_volume_statistics

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

With no annotations, the description takes full burden. It explicitly states read-only nature, describes the output (counters, serial), and notes the absence of label-text field. It covers the key behavioral aspects, though could elaborate on error conditions.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the key purpose and read-only flag, no filler. 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?

Given an output schema exists, the description adequately covers the key points: what is read (page 17h), the data elements, and prerequisite config. It is sufficient for an agent to decide and invoke the 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% with each parameter described. The description adds context about 'mounted media' for the drive and references the Proximo config, providing extra meaning beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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 is a read-only operation that reads SCSI log-page-17h volume statistics, listing specific data (byte counters, error counters, serial). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pbs_tape_drive_status by focusing on volume statistics and noting 'no label-text field'.

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 declares 'READ-ONLY' indicating safe invocation and mentions the prerequisite 'Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config'. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the context of sibling tape drive tools and the specific telemetry focus provides clear usage context.

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