vm_guest_shutdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=true. Beyond those, the description adds real context: the medium risk level, that the state change is reversible via power-on, and that dry_run runs a self-lockout guard. It does not describe timing or completion semantics, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loads the [WRITE][risk=medium] tags and the one-line purpose before the Args block, so the critical facts are read first. Slightly terse on argument formatting but no 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?

With no output schema and 3 fully documented parameters, the description supplies what an agent needs to select and invoke the tool correctly, including reversibility. The only gap is the absence of any comparison with the adjacent power/rebooot tools.

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 0%, yet the description documents all three parameters: vm_ext_id ('as returned by vm_list'), dry_run (preview behavior and guard), and target ('Prism Central target name from config; omit for the default'). This fully compensates for the empty schema and adds meaning the agent could not otherwise infer.

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 verb+resource ('Graceful in-guest shutdown'), and the qualifier 'in-guest' plus 'graceful' clearly separates it from the sibling vm_power_off (hard power off) without needing to open either schema. An agent can identify the operation and its mechanism immediately.

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 explains the dry_run preview and the self-lockout guard, which is invocation guidance, but never states when to choose this over vm_power_off, vm_reboot, or vm_power_on, nor any exclusions. Usage is implied by 'graceful' rather than explicitly routed.

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