Get storage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the server-scope and the underlying REST operation (GET /server/storage), but no additional behavioral context like auth requirements or response format.

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 short and front-loaded: it starts with a one-line title and immediately expands on the purpose. The final line provides API metadata. The only minor redundancy is the first line repeating the tool title, but overall it is 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?

Given the low complexity (no parameters, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description is nearly complete. It states what the tool returns ('storage utilization information'), though it could be slightly more specific about the shape of that information. No output schema means the description carries some burden, but it is adequate.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline score of 4 applies per the rubric. No parameter semantics are needed, and the description does not introduce confusion.

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+resource ('Retrieve the current storage utilization information of the server') and scopes it to the server, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like immich_get_album_statistics or immich_get_asset_statistics. It does not explicitly name a sibling it might be confused with, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to select it.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose ('Retrieve storage utilization'), suggesting it is called to monitor server storage capacity. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool guidance, so it is only adequate.

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