pve_ceph_cfg_db

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

Despite no annotations, description discloses it is READ-ONLY and provides the API path. Notes that output shape is 'not live-verified' and lists expected fields. Does not cover authorization or rate limits, but covers key behavior sufficiently.

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: first states purpose and HTTP method, second provides sibling guidance and output shape note. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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?

With output schema present, description explains shape expectations and sibling differentiation. Input schema covers all params. No gaps for agent decision-making.

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%; both parameters have descriptions in the schema. Description adds no further parameter details beyond what schema provides, so 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 starts with 'READ-ONLY: the Ceph configuration database', clearly stating the action and resource. It specifies the HTTP GET endpoint and distinguishes from siblings pve_ceph_cfg_raw and pve_ceph_cfg_value.

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 tells when to use alternatives: 'For the raw ceph.conf text use pve_ceph_cfg_raw; for specific keys only use pve_ceph_cfg_value.' Also marks the tool as READ-ONLY, implying no modifications.

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