block_storage_list_volumes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states a simple list operation without mentioning read-only nature, pagination, or any side effects. The description is insufficient for understanding the tool's behavior beyond the obvious.

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 a single, front-loaded phrase that is concise with no wasted words. However, it could include slightly more context (e.g., about optional filters) without losing conciseness.

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 existence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain returns. However, it omits mention that name and tags are optional filters, leaving the agent unaware of these filtering capabilities without inspecting the schema.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (name, tags, zone) with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'block volumes', and specifies the scope 'in a zone'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like block_storage_list_snapshots by naming the resource. However, it does not further differentiate from other list tools that may also operate in a zone.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as instances_list_volumes or get_volume. It lacks any contextual cues for appropriate use cases.

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