list_block_devices

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It indicates a read-only listing operation and mentions the JSON output form via `lsblk -J`, but it does not disclose potential permission requirements, how devices are ordered, or whether the output is a single array or grouped structure. It is adequate but not rich.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the key information about the resource and fields, then adds the command reference. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 parameterless listing tool, the description covers the essential return fields and the output format. It is sufficiently complete given the lack of annotations and output schema, though it could mention any caveats like requiring root privileges or the JSON structure, but these are not critical for basic use.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by specifying what data the tool returns, which is the only meaningful semantic content. There are no parameters to clarify.

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 it lists block devices and enumerates the exact attributes returned (size, model, serial, fs, mountpoint, uuid). It also names the underlying command (lsblk -J), which makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from siblings like list_disks or list_filesystems.

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 usage when block device details are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_disks, list_filesystems, or storage_summary. No exclusions or alternative mentions are provided, so the guidance is only implicit.

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