vm_migrate

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full weight. It identifies as a WRITE operation, asynchronous, and explains dry_run preview. Could add more on safety or prerequisites, but covers key behavioral aspects.

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?

Efficiently structured: one-line summary, usage notes, then parameter list. No wasted words, all sentences add value.

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 main aspects: purpose, async nature, parameters, return value (task UPID). Lacks details on error handling or node capacity requirements, but sufficient for agent understanding given tool complexity.

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 coverage, the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter in Arg format, including defaults and behavior (e.g., online for live vs. stopped migration). Adds significant meaning beyond schema 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 the tool performs VM migration, returns a task UPID, and notes the inverse operation. It distinguishes effectively from sibling tools like vm_start or vm_stop.

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?

Provides clear context: asynchronous operation requiring task_status polling, and dry_run for preview. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or comparison with alternatives.

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