inspect_storage

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

With no annotations provided, the description alone must disclose behavior. The word 'Summarize' implies a read-only aggregate operation, but it doesn't explicitly state whether this causes side effects, requires permissions, or may be expensive on large storage. The return format is also undisclosed.

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 a single, compact phrase with no filler words. It front-loads the action and lists the scope efficiently. Every word 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?

For a zero-parameter tool, the description gives a reasonable idea of what is summarized, but there is no output schema and no behavioral context such as result shape, pagination, or cost implications. The description is minimally viable but leaves the agent unsure what response to expect.

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 input schema is empty with zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain about parameters. The description's listed items are output categories rather than parameters, which is appropriate for a no-argument tool.

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 verb, 'Summarize', and a resource scope: 'namespaces, key counts, file/vector inventory'. This clearly identifies what the tool does, though it doesn't differentiate it from similarly named siblings like files_list or kvp_list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like files_list, kvp_list, or usage_get. An agent is left to infer that 'inspect_storage' is the aggregate/browse operation, but no explicit context or exclusions are given.

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