get_project_storage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It states it performs a read operation ('Get'), implying no destructive side effects. However, it lacks details on permissions, response format, or any constraints beyond that.

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 a single concise sentence with no extraneous information. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without wasting 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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly adequate but lacks details on the return value format or units. It is moderately complete for a straightforward read operation.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not add meaning to the projectId parameter beyond what the schema provides. It does not specify format, source, or constraints, so the agent must infer from the name.

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 specifies the verb 'Get', the resource 'file storage quota and usage', and the scope 'for a project'. It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_project or get_project_metrics.

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 implies usage when storage quota/usage is needed but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives are mentioned, but the purpose is clear enough to infer usage context.

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