analyze_storage

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

Annotations indicate read-only, which description does not contradict. Description adds valuable behavioral details about action scopes (cross-platform vs Arch-specific) beyond the annotation.

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?

Extremely concise two-sentence description with a [MONITORING] tag for quick identification. No unnecessary words; every piece of information earns its place.

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 a single required parameter with enum, readOnlyHint annotation, and no output schema, the description provides all necessary context for correct agent invocation, including action-specific constraints.

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 covers all parameters with enum descriptions. The description enhances meaning by explaining each action's purpose (check disk space, analyze cache), which is not present in the schema alone.

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?

Description clearly states it's a unified storage analysis tool with two specific actions: disk_usage and cache_stats. It is distinct from sibling tools which focus on configuration or package management.

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?

Provides explicit context on system compatibility: disk_usage works on any system, cache_stats is Arch-only. This guides appropriate use, though no alternative tools are mentioned.

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