vm_list

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses defaults for include_esxi and limit, and mentions that the result reports 'returned', 'limit', and 'truncated' for capped reads. Provides useful behavioral details beyond a basic read annotation.

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?

Very concise: 7 lines including Args section. Front-loaded with purpose in first sentence. No redundant or unnecessary text.

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?

Covers purpose, parameters, and pagination behavior. Lacks explicit details about response fields (but no output schema). Adequate for a list tool with optional parameters and expected truncation handling.

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 coverage is 0%, but description fully compensates: explains each parameter's purpose and behavior (include_esxi default True, limit default 500 with truncation reporting, target as Prism Central name). Adds meaning beyond schema names and types.

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?

Starts with '[READ] List VMs — AHV and (by default) ESXi-backed too; hypervisor field distinguishes.' Clearly states verb (List), resource (VMs), and scope (AHV and ESXi). Distinguishes from sibling list tools by mentioning hypervisor field.

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?

Implied usage: list VMs. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to sibling tools like snapshot_list or vm_get. Lacks guidance on alternatives.

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