hmc_create_logical_unit

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the async job model, result field LUCreated, and wait behavior, and explains the meaning of key parameters like cloned_from. It does not mention failure modes, permissions, or side effects, but covers the essential behavioral traits.

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 compact, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence contributes useful information about workflow, parameters, or helper tools. It avoids filler and is easy to scan.

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 tool with 9 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers key semantics, job polling, and wait options. Minor gaps remain around poll_interval/timeout details and explicit prerequisites, but the description is substantially complete for operational use.

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%, so the description compensates by defining lu_type, device_type, cloned_from, cluster_uuid, and wait. It leaves poll_interval and timeout_seconds unexplained, but the core required and distinguishing parameters receive meaningful clarification beyond raw names.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a Logical Unit (file-backed disk) in a Cluster/SSP.' It clearly distinguishes the tool as creating a storage logical unit rather than a VM or adapter, which fits the sibling context.

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 explicit guidance: submit job, poll hmc_get_job, use LUCreated for UDID, find cluster_uuid via hmc_list_clusters, and set wait=True to block. It clearly outlines the asynchronous workflow, though it does not explicitly contrast with hmc_create_virtual_disk or other similar tools.

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