list_supervisor_storage_policies

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds that 'one call returns them all' making truncated always false, and describes the return envelope structure, providing useful behavioral context beyond 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?

Every sentence is purposeful: READ tag, purpose, return details, usage guide, and parameter explanation. It's front-loaded and concise with no wasted words.

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 list tool with one parameter and comprehensive annotations, the description covers return format, pagination, usage context, and parameter details. No additional information is needed.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining the 'target' parameter as 'vCenter in config.yaml; omit for the default,' adding meaning that the schema lacks.

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 'List vCenter storage policies assignable to Supervisor Namespaces' with a specific verb (list) and resource (storage policies). It distinguishes from sibling tool list_namespace_storage_usage by noting it is for PVC-level usage.

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?

Explicitly says to call this before create_namespace or update_namespace to obtain a storage_policy ID, and directs to list_namespace_storage_usage for PVC-level usage, providing clear when-to and when-not-to guidance.

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