List block devices

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the operation safe, and the description's 'list' wording is consistent with a read-only behavior. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond that, such as privilege requirements or output nuances, but neither does it omit anything critical for a simple list operation.

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 one short sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it immediately scannable for an agent.

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 read-only tool with one optional parameter, an output schema, and a clear description, nothing essential is missing. The only minor gap is that the description doesn't explicitly acknowledge the remote host option, though the schema fully covers it.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%: the only parameter, 'host', is fully described as an optional remote SSH connection target. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, which is acceptable given the schema already handles it.

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 names a specific verb ('list') and resource ('block devices') with scope ('on the system'), clearly identifying the tool's function. No sibling tool covers block devices, so it is easy to distinguish from alternatives like list_directories or list_services.

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 when to use the tool: whenever block devices on the target system need to be listed. However, it offers no explicit guidance about alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name and siblings.

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