proxmox_guest_pending

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

With no annotations, the description should explain behavioral traits. It only states the tool gets pending changes but does not disclose that it is a read-only operation, return format, or any prerequisites. Minimal value added beyond the name.

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?

A single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 description lacks details about the return value (e.g., format, structure) and does not mention any output schema. For a tool that retrieves data, this is incomplete.

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 67% (node and vmid have descriptions, type has enum only). The description does not add new parameter details beyond stating support for VM and LXC, which is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does most of the work.

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 ('Get pending configuration changes') and the resource (VM or LXC container), distinguishing it from sibling tools like proxmox_guest_config which retrieves current configuration.

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 the tool is for viewing unapplied changes, which distinguishes it from other guest tools. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like proxmox_guest_config.

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