Purge volume snapshots

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the operation is destructive and requires explicit user authorization, which is valuable. But it does not say whether the purge is permanent/irreversible, what data is freed, or what side effects occur beyond removal.

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 sentences plus a docs link; the core action is front-loaded and the safety warning follows directly. No redundant phrasing, and the link adds value without bloating the description.

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 destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a single undocumented parameter, the description provides a safety warning but omits how success is confirmed, prerequisites, and the precise meaning of 'removed snapshots' in Longhorn. The docs link partially compensates, but the definition remains incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0% and the only parameter 'name' is undocumented in the schema. The description implies the target is a volume ('of a volume') but never explicitly states that 'name' refers to the volume name, leaving ambiguity about whether a snapshot name could also be expected.

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?

States a specific verb (purge) and target (removed snapshots of a volume). The phrase 'removed snapshots' distinguishes it from sibling volume_snapshot_delete, which targets existing snapshots, though it does not explicitly name that alternative.

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 an explicit when-not-to-call rule: only with user authorization, never proactively, speculatively, or as a side effect. It does not, however, state when this tool is appropriate relative to alternatives like volume_snapshot_delete.

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