Unraid API disk

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

The annotations already mark the call as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a meaningful behavioral disclosure: the response deliberately omits serial number and detailed geometry, which is not captured by annotations or the input 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?

One compact sentence with the verb and primary action first, followed by the output restriction. No filler and no repetition of the title.

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 single-parameter read-only query with annotations covering safety, the description is near-sufficient, but it lacks any note on response format, missing-disk behavior, or how the id maps to other disk endpoints. It also does not clarify what fields are actually returned beyond the two exclusions.

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 never mentions the id parameter or explains how to obtain a valid disk id. The agent can only infer that id identifies the disk from the tool name and phrase 'Get one disk'; no relationship to query_disks/list_disks is provided.

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 states a specific action ('Get'), a specific resource ('one disk'), and a sharp scoping constraint ('without returning its serial number or detailed geometry'). This clearly distinguishes it from the plural/list disk siblings and makes the tool's role 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?

No alternative tools are named and there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance. The singular 'one disk' and the omission clause imply a lightweight single-disk lookup, but the agent is not told to prefer this over unraid_v4371_query_disks or unraid_list_disks, or when those would be needed.

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