dpanel_volume_detailRetrieve detailed information about a Docker volume by name, including its configuration and usage. Use it to inspect volume properties before managing or troubleshooting container storage.
卷详情。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.11.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about what 'detail' returns, permissions required, or any side effects. It supplies zero behavioral context for an undocumented read tool.
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?
It is terse, but this is under-specification rather than earned conciseness. The single fragment conveys almost nothing and leaves the agent without actionable information.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but with no annotations, an undocumented parameter, and no usage context, the definition is far from complete for a tool an agent must invoke 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 single required parameter 'name' has 0% schema description coverage, so the schema does not explain it. The description makes no attempt to compensate, never mentioning the name parameter, its expected format, or what it identifies.
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 "卷详情。" (Volume detail) essentially restates the tool name and title without adding a distinct verb+resource statement. It implies a read/detail operation but does not distinguish itself from siblings like dpanel_volume_list or dpanel_volume_create beyond the naming convention.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as dpanel_volume_list (which likely enumerates volumes) or dpanel_volume_create/delete. No prerequisites, no context, no exclusions are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.