vm_exec

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return of a PID and the QEMU Guest Agent mechanism, but omits details such as whether the tool is non-blocking, error conditions (e.g., agent not running), or timeouts.

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?

Two concise sentences, no extra words. Front-loaded with the core action and follow-up guidance.

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?

No output schema is provided, but the description explains the return value (PID) and references the companion tool for results. It lacks prerequisites (e.g., QEMU agent must be running) but is otherwise adequate for a simple command execution tool.

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?

All 3 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining the execution context (QEMU Guest Agent) and the return information (PID), which are not in 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 the tool executes a command in a VM via QEMU Guest Agent and returns a PID. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'vm_exec_status' and 'vm_exec_sync' by mentioning the async pattern.

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 points to using 'vm_exec_status' to retrieve results, implying an asynchronous execution pattern. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over synchronous alternatives like 'vm_exec_sync'.

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