pve_storage_content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by detailing return fields (volid, size, format, vmid, ctime) and the filtering parameter (content types). No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Each sentence adds value: purpose, scope, optional filter, output structure, and source. No redundant or vague phrases.

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 (not shown), the description still summarizes return values well. It covers scope, filtering, and output format. Could mention prerequisites (e.g., storage existence) but not critical for a read-only list tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description explains the 'content' parameter with specific values (iso, backup, vztmpl, images) and implies the roles of 'node' and 'storage' via context ('on a node', 'on a storage'). Partial but effective compensation.

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 'contents of a storage on a node'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying scope (one storage on one node) and optional content type filtering, differentiating it from pve_list_storage etc.

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 specifies the context: listing contents of a single storage on a single node with optional filtering. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives, the scope is clear and directly informs decision-making.

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