get_dial_storage_info

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

The description adds context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it reveals that accessibility is request- and identity-dependent ('the identity in use, the bucket it owns') and that storage is per-user. It also discloses that the report covers both read and write capabilities, a useful nuance.

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?

Two tightly packed paragraphs: one sentence states the purpose, one short paragraph gives the explicit trigger condition and underlying rationale. No filler, and the key information is front-loaded.

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, read-only informational tool with an output schema present, the description provides everything needed to call it correctly and interpret the result. It includes the trigger condition and the contextual reason the reported values matter.

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 input schema carries no meaning. The description fully compensates by specifying exactly what the report contains — identity, owned bucket, and appdata path — serving as the sole semantic documentation.

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 ('Report') and a specific resource ('which DIAL file storage this server can actually read and write on this request'), and enumerates the exact fields reported (identity, bucket, appdata path). It is clearly distinct from siblings like get_server_info or get_presentation_info, which target server-wide or presentation-level information.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent when to invoke it: 'Use it when a file URL is refused.' It then explains the per-user storage model so the agent can interpret the result and recognize why a valid-looking URL may be undownloadable.

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