storage_get_volumes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful behavioral context: it returns volume paths with platform-specific examples, and specifies the source of these volumes (Media page's storage panel). This informs the agent about the nature of the return data beyond just 'read only'.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and immediately provides concrete examples of return values. Every word contributes value without redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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 no parameters, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and where the data comes from. The output schema (though not shown) is implied to list paths, and the description aligns with that expectation. No additional context is needed.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description correctly provides no parameter details. The baseline of 4 applies because there is no parameter complexity to explain, and the focused text covers the tool's behavior sufficiently.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('mounted media storage volumes visible to DaVinci Resolve'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like storage_get_subfolders and storage_get_files by focusing on top-level volumes. The examples of volume paths further clarify the resource type.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: to retrieve all mounted media volumes that appear in the Media page's storage panel. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is well-defined and differentiates it from storage navigation tools that operate at subfolder/file levels.

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