Convert Guest to Template

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

Annotations already convey destructive and idempotent hints, so the description's additional 'requires elevated permissions' provides some useful context. However, it does not disclose important behavior such as prerequisite state (e.g., guest being stopped) or consequences like the guest no longer operating as a normal VM or container.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action and target, and the parenthetical type/permission notes are efficient. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 three-parameter tool with clear annotations this is nearly adequate, but the description omits a non-obvious operational prerequisite: the VM or container must likely be stopped before conversion. Without that, an agent may attempt the call against an active guest and fail.

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?

The schema documents node and vmid, while type is only an enum; the description compensates slightly by restating 'type=vm|lxc'. No additional semantic detail is given for node or vmid, so the description adds only marginal value beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Convert') and a precise resource ('a VM or LXC container to a template'), with the type parameter inline. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like clone, create, or config_update, which serve different purposes.

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 clearly establishes the use case: converting an existing VM or LXC container into a template, and notes the elevated permission requirement. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, but the context is clear enough for basic routing.

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