list_supervisor_storage_policies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it 'Returns list of storage policies with compatible cluster IDs,' providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences plus a bracketed tag convey the purpose and usage without extraneous text. Every sentence adds value.

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?

While the output schema exists and the description mentions return content, the critical omission of parameter documentation makes the tool incomplete for correct invocation. For a simple tool with one parameter, this is a significant gap.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the 'target' parameter. With only one optional parameter, failing to document its purpose leaves the agent without necessary semantic guidance.

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 starts with '[READ] List storage policies available for Supervisor Namespaces,' providing a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_namespaces' and 'create_namespace' by focusing on storage policies.

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 states 'Use this to find valid storage_policy values before creating namespaces,' giving clear context on when to use the tool. It implies a prerequisite for namespace creation but does not explicitly exclude other uses.

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