pve_storage_config_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It correctly declares the tool as read-only, which is the primary behavioral trait. It also outlines the return structure, adding transparency. However, it does not mention auth requirements or potential performance considerations, but given the simplicity of a list operation, this is acceptable.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that cover purpose, return structure, and alternative use. Every word is meaningful, with no repetition or fluff.

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?

For a simple list operation with an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what it lists, where from, and return fields. It does not mention ordering or limits, but these are not critical for usage. Overall, it is complete enough for an AI agent to use correctly.

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?

The input schema already provides a complete description of the sole parameter (proximo_target) with 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema offers, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the tool lists all storage definitions from storage.cfg cluster-wide, explicitly mentions it is read-only, and describes the return fields (IDs, types, paths, server addresses). It also distinguishes from the sibling tool pve_storage_config_get, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clear guidance on when to use this tool (list all storage) and when to use the alternative (pve_storage_config_get for single storage). Although it does not explicitly say when not to use it, the context is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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