get_filesystem_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the useful operational detail that it 'never scans' beyond a simple snapshot, which is not implied by readOnlyHint alone, though the remaining side-effect guarantees largely reinforce 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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no waste. The read-only constraint and return contents are stated immediately.

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 the description need not explain the return format, but it helpfully states that it returns space and inode usage. For a zero-argument, read-only snapshot tool, this is nearly complete; only explicit sibling routing is missing.

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?

Zero parameters is the baseline score of 4. The description correctly notes it takes no arguments, and there are no parameter semantics 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?

States a specific resource ('mounted-filesystem') and exactly what it returns ('space and inode usage'). Distinguishes itself from sibling memory and CPU tools by resource, and the read-only snapshot framing makes the operation unambiguous.

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?

Clearly says it takes no arguments and never scans, changes, or deletes files, which tells the agent when it is safe to call. Does not explicitly name alternatives such as analyze_file_distribution or simulate_disk_allocation, so sibling routing relies on the resource name.

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