proxmox_guest_config_update

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states it updates config (mutating) and requires elevated permissions, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., impact on running VM, need for restart, overwrite behavior). The delete parameter is mentioned but not explained in context.

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 extremely concise: one sentence with a parenthetical. It front-loads the core action and qualifies with type and permissions. No extraneous words.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should clarify return values or success signals, but it does not. It does usefully cross-reference proxmox_guest_config for valid keys. Overall, it covers the basics but misses operational details like error handling or confirmation.

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 high (80%), so the schema already documents parameters. The description adds little new meaning: it repeats the type enum and mentions key-value pairs, which is already in the schema. No additional syntax or value constraints are provided.

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 updates VM/LXC config key-value pairs, specifies the type parameter (vm or lxc), and notes it requires elevated permissions. This distinguishes it from read-only tools like proxmox_guest_config and other mutation tools like proxmox_guest_disk_move.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it. The mention of elevated permissions is helpful but insufficient for an agent to decide between this and other config-related siblings.

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