clone_vm

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that cloning works from templates or stopped VMs, and that full/linked clone is controlled by a parameter. However, it does not describe side effects, what happens to the source, or permission requirements. The information is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences, front-loading the primary action. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary fluff.

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?

For a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main functionality succinctly. It explains the source constraints and supported options. Some details like linked vs full clone are only in schema, but overall it is fairly complete for the context.

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 100% description coverage for all 8 parameters. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., mentions clone type and target support but these are also in schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 clones a QEMU VM or template, creating a new VM from a source (template or stopped VM). It specifies support for choosing target node and storage, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like destroy_vm or start_vm.

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 source must be a template or stopped VM, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_snapshot or destroy_vm. No 'when not to use' or comparison with siblings.

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