Field Storage List

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation but never states that it is non-destructive, nor does it explain pagination defaults, filter behavior, result ordering, or volume limits for a listing that could return many configurations.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity is a byproduct of under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the definition leaves key calling details unresolved: what the opaque 'filters' object accepts, how pagination behaves, and whether the call is safe/read-only. For a tool with a fully undocumented parameter surface, this is inadequate.

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% and the description adds nothing about any of the three parameters. The 'filters' parameter is an untyped object with additionalProperties:true, and page_limit/page_offset defaults are undocumented in prose, so an agent has no guidance on accepted filter keys or pagination semantics.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List all field storage configurations') scoped to a Drupal site. The plural 'all' implicitly distinguishes it from the single-resource siblings field_storage_get, field_storage_create, and field_storage_update, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus field_storage_get, field_config_list, or field_config_get. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or the conditions under which a caller would prefer this listing over the alternatives.

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