vm_migrate

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is a write operation with medium risk, captures the source host for undo, and notes that dry_run does not record undo. This goes beyond what the schema provides.

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 brief opening line, a sentence about undo behavior, and a clean list of arguments. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded.

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 covers the core behavior, including undo and dry_run, but lacks details about return values or error handling. Given the complexity, it is mostly complete but could be slightly more thorough.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaningful semantics for all four parameters: vm_id, host_id, dry_run, and target. It clarifies each parameter's purpose and provides references to related tools (vm_list, host_list).

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 it is a write operation to 'Live-migrate a VM to another host' and mentions the inverse operation. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vm_start, vm_stop, etc., which have different purposes.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool, including the inverse migration and dry_run preview. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use it, leaving some ambiguity.

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