proxmox_guest_clone

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'requires elevated permissions' and specifies the guest types. However, it does not describe the cloning process's impact (e.g., non-destructive to source), return behavior, or other side effects. This is a minimal disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys essential information without any waste. Every word serves a purpose, making it highly 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 tool has 6 parameters (4 required) and no output schema. The description covers the core purpose and a permission caveat, but does not explain return values, error conditions, or the expected workflow. For a clone operation, this is sufficient for basic understanding but lacks completeness for nuanced agent decision-making.

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 description coverage is 83%, so most parameters are documented within the schema. The description adds no extra parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It mentions the 'type' parameter implicitly via examples, but does not enhance understanding of other parameters like 'name' or 'hostname'.

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 action ('Clone'), the resource types ('VM (type=vm) or LXC container (type=lxc)'), and a key requirement ('requires elevated permissions'). It distinguishes between the two guest types, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 that elevated permissions are required, but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like proxmox_create_vm or proxmox_guest_migrate. It implies usage for cloning, but no explicit when-not or comparative context.

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