Dpanel Volume Prune

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the two critical traits: the operation is destructive and requires an explicit confirm=true gate. It stops short of defining what qualifies as 'unused' or stating irreversibility/scope of removal, so a slight gap remains.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The destructive warning and the confirm requirement are both packed into minimal text with zero 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the one-parameter schema is fully covered by the confirm note. For a destructive prune tool the safety profile is adequately conveyed, though eligibility criteria for 'unused' volumes remain unstated.

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 parameter (confirm) has 0% schema description coverage and only a default of false, so the description must supply its meaning. It does exactly that by stating confirm=true is required, which is the essential semantic for this gate.

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 gives a specific verb (清理/prune) and resource (未使用卷/unused volumes), so an agent can distinguish it from generic volume operations like dpanel_volume_delete. It does not explicitly name the sibling it contrasts with, but the 'unused' qualifier carries the distinction.

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?

It states the destructive condition that gates use (confirm=true), which is implied guidance about caution. However, it never says when to prefer this over dpanel_volume_delete (targeted removal) or lists any prerequisite/alternative, leaving the routing inference to the reader.

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