vm_reboot

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

The description includes a '[WRITE][risk=medium]' tag indicating it is a mutating operation with medium risk. It also clarifies there is no inverse operation. However, it does not disclose details like required permissions, whether the reboot is graceful or forced, or if the operation is synchronous or asynchronous. In the absence of annotations, this provides moderate transparency.

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 with a clear header line and a structured 'Args' section. It avoids unnecessary details and front-loads the purpose. Every sentence is informative, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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 tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It explains all parameters and notes the risk level. However, it lacks details about return behavior (e.g., whether it returns immediately or waits) and potential side effects, but these are minor gaps for a straightforward reboot operation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the tool description fully compensates by explaining all three parameters: vm_ext_id ('VM extId as returned by vm_list'), dry_run ('return what WOULD be rebooted without doing it'), and target ('Prism Central target name...'). These descriptions add significant meaning beyond the schema's bare titles.

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 'Reboot a VM' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like vm_power_off and vm_guest_shutdown by noting it performs a reboot. The phrase 'no distinct inverse' adds clarity about reversibility.

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 provide guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It does not specify use cases, prerequisites, or conditions for choosing reboot versus power off or guest shutdown. The only contextual hint is 'no distinct inverse', which is insufficient.

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