storage_management

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

The description reveals that the tool is a portmanteau (multiplexed), but with no annotations, it fails to disclose behavioral traits like destructiveness, side effects, or required permissions. For a tool with destructive actions (e.g., remove_controller), this is insufficient.

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 short but includes redundant listing of actions already in schema. The term 'portmanteau' adds clutter. Could be more efficient without losing clarity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, conditional dependency on action), the description is too high-level. It doesn't explain parameter relationships, conditional requirements beyond the schema, or output behavior, even though an output schema exists.

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 high (78%) and the schema already provides detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds little beyond saying to use the 'action' parameter, so it meets baseline but doesn't compensate for remaining gaps.

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 identifies the tool as a storage management portmanteau and lists operations, making it clear it handles storage tasks. However, the phrase 'portmanteau tool' is jargon and the purpose isn't stated with a single precise verb+resource.

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 implies use for any storage operation, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use vs alternatives. Since there are no sibling storage tools, no exclusions are needed, but the description could be more direct.

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