Guest Agent File Access

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, and the description adds 'requires elevated permissions' and specifies the QEMU agent mechanism. This is useful but doesn't elaborate on side effects or failure modes; no contradiction with annotations.

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 a single sentence with no fluff, front-loading the core action and resource, then adding the operation and permission constraint. Efficient and scannable.

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 6-param mutation tool, the description is thin; it doesn't mention that the guest agent must be running or that the guest must be online. However, the schema covers parameter details and annotations cover safety, so the description is minimally adequate.

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?

Schema coverage is 83%, so the schema documents most parameters. The description adds a brief note on operation=read|write, which is already in the enum, and mentions permissions but doesn't add meaning beyond the schema's property descriptions.

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 'Read/write files via QEMU agent' linking a specific action (read/write) to a resource (guest files) and mechanism (QEMU agent). It distinguishes this from sibling exec and other agent tools by focusing on file access. The operation=read|write detail reinforces the purpose.

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 implies usage for reading or writing files inside a VM through the QEMU agent, and notes elevated permissions as a prerequisite. However, it doesn't explicitly provide when-to-use vs alternatives or exclusions, such as preferring storage/backup tools for non-running guests.

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