hmc_shared_storage_pools

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral context beyond that: it explains the two modes (list vs. detail), the fields returned (capacity, free space, logical units vs. physical volumes, logical units), and the None return for not found. This is useful but doesn't cover error conditions or pagination, so not a 5.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence summary followed by two conditional paragraphs. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy or fluff.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the main behavior, return shapes, and not-found case. Given the absence of an output schema, it adequately explains what the agent can expect. No critical gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden for the single parameter ssp_uuid. It fully explains the semantics: omitting yields a list, providing yields a detail dict or None. This is clear and complete, adding rich meaning beyond the raw schema definition.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'List Shared Storage Pools or get one by UUID.' It names the specific resource (Shared Storage Pools) and distinguishes between list and get-by-ID behavior, differentiating it from sibling tools like hmc_list_memory_pools or hmc_list_volume_groups.

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 conditional usage: omit ssp_uuid to list all pools, or provide it to get one pool. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool when dealing with shared storage pools. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance.

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