Retrieve current VM statistics including memory, CPU percentage, network, and disk usage with units. Specify VM ID to get real-time performance metrics.
[READ] A VM's current statistics: memory, CPU %, network and disk usage, with units.
Args: vm_id: VM id. target: Engine target name from config; omit to use the default.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| vm_id | Yes | ||
| target | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It includes a '[READ]' marker implying read-only, but discloses nothing about authentication, rate limits, side effects, or error behavior. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely has operational implications.
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, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses a clean structure with an args section. Every sentence contributes value, and there is 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?
The description mentions the returned metrics (memory, CPU %, network, disk) but lacks usage guidance and behavioral context. Without annotations or an output schema, an agent has limited understanding of when to use this tool or what errors or edge cases to expect.
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 description gives brief explanations for both parameters: vm_id is 'VM id' (minimal, tautological) and target is 'Engine target name from config; omit to use the default' (adds config context and default behavior). Since schema coverage is 0%, this partially compensates, but vm_id could be more descriptive.
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 the tool reads a VM's current statistics (memory, CPU %, network, disk) with units, using a specific verb and resource. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like vm_get or vm_health_rca, but the purpose is unambiguous.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vm_get, vm_list, or vm_health_rca. The agent is left to infer the appropriate context, and no exclusions or conditions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.