proxmox_guest_start

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only notes that elevated permissions are needed. It does not disclose idempotency, side effects (e.g., if already running), or whether the operation is synchronous.

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 15 words, conveying essential information without fluff. It is front-loaded and 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?

With three required parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description should provide more context: e.g., return behavior, error conditions, or prerequisites beyond permissions. It is insufficient for a tool that mutates system state.

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 67%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema: 'type' enum is already listed, and node/vmid descriptions are in the schema. The description only restates what's in the parameter names.

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 verb 'Start' and specifies both resource types (VM and LXC). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like stop, shutdown, resume, etc., by the action and type.

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 starting a guest that is stopped, but does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives like resume. It mentions 'requires elevated permissions' but offers no exclusion criteria or context.

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