vm_start

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates a write operation via '[WRITE][risk=medium]' but does not disclose side effects (e.g., behavior if VM already running), permissions required, or whether the operation can be undone. The dry_run parameter hints at undo recording, but this is not explicitly explained.

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-loading purpose and risk, then briefly listing arguments. Every sentence is relevant and efficient.

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 adequately covers parameters and gives basic usage context. However, it lacks details on return values, error conditions, and more nuanced behavior (e.g., what happens if dry_run is true). Given no output schema, some additional context would be beneficial.

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 description explains all three parameters well: vm_id (VM uuid, referencing vm_list), dry_run (preview without undo), and target (Xen Orchestra target name, optional). This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 'Start a VM' with the verb 'Start' and resource 'VM'. It also includes a risk label and explicitly names the inverse tool (vm_stop), distinguishing it from siblings.

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 mentions the inverse tool (vm_stop) which provides context for when to use this tool versus stopping. However, it does not elaborate on when to use start versus other VM operations like reboot or migrate, nor does it specify prerequisites.

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