scan_datastore_images

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint true and destructiveHint false, so the description's '[READ]' label adds confirmation but not new behavioral insight. No additional behavioral context (e.g., scanning duration, permissions) is provided.

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 concise (5 lines), front-loaded with the purpose, and each sentence serves a clear function. The Args block is well-structured and no redundant information is present.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the action and parameters. However, it could briefly mention what the scan returns (e.g., list of image paths) for completeness, but this is minor.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args block fully explains all three parameters (ds_name, path, target) with their meanings and defaults, adding significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 'Scan' and the resource 'datastore for deployable images (OVA, ISO, OVF, VMDK)', which distinguishes it from siblings like 'browse_datastore' (browsing) or 'list_cached_images' (cached images).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It relies on sibling names and context for differentiation, lacking explicit when-not or alternative tool references.

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