pve_node_storage_backend_create

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

The description explicitly labels it as a mutation, states that disks are consumed, requires confirm=True to execute, and warns that the endpoint is not live-verified and may return an async task UPID. This provides valuable behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 reasonably concise and front-loads the mutation type and backend types. Some technical jargon is present, but it is clear and efficient. A slight improvement could be adding a line about the output.

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 7 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the core functionality, per-backend requirements, and async behavior. However, the 'kw' parameter and output details are missing, leaving some gaps.

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 low (14%), but the description adds meaning for key parameters: it explains the per-backend parameter requirements (e.g., devices, raidlevel, filesystem). However, the 'kw' parameter is not explained.

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 'MUTATION: create a storage backend on the node' and lists supported backend types (lvm/lvmthin/zfs/directory). It distinguishes from sibling tools like pve_node_storage_backend_delete and pve_node_storage_backend_list by specifying the create action.

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 provides per-backend required parameters (e.g., devices for lvm, devices+filesystem for directory) and mentions the confirm flag. However, it does not explicitly contrast with pve_storage_create (a sibling with similar name) or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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