list_volumes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds behavioral value by nailing down what 'every' means: attached or not and boot or non-boot. It does not contradict annotations and needs no additional safety caveats for a read-only list operation.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence starts with the action verb 'List' and the main object, with a parenthetical that precisely expands the scope. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 parameterless, read-only list tool with clear annotations, the description is largely sufficient: it tells the agent what is returned (the set of standalone volumes) and how broad that set is. It does not detail output shape or pagination, but the simple resource concept and safe operation make this a minor gap.

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 has zero properties, so there are no parameters for the description to explain. With 0 parameters, the baseline of 4 applies, and the description appropriately gives no parameter information because none is needed.

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 ('List') and resource ('standalone storage volume'), and the parenthetical further clarifies scope: 'attached to a VPS or not, boot or non-boot'. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like list_vps (VPS instances) and get_volume (single volume) without needing to inspect schemas.

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 clear context: use this tool when you need to enumerate every volume on the account, regardless of attachment or boot status. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the scope is unambiguous enough to route the agent correctly among the many sibling tools.

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