deploy_vm_from_ova

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral details beyond the annotations: it returns a status string naming the new VM, upload time scales with OVA size, and it 'fails before creating anything if the datastore is not found.' This gives the agent a clear picture of side effects, performance, and a failure atomicity guarantee that annotations alone do not convey.

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 four sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core actioneb7a and [WRITE] marker, then the usage differentiation, return value, and behavior caveats. Every sentence earns its place.

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 an 8-parameter creation tool, the description plus fully described schema covers what the agent needs: the operation, usage conditions, return value, failure behavior, and performance expectation. The output schema exists and the annotations cover mutability, so no critical decision-making context is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 8 parameters including defaults and semantics. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond mentioning the datastore failure condition, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Create a new VM by importing a local .ova file' and even names the underlying mechanism (OVF parse + VMDK upload). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from deploy_vm_from_template and vm_clone, making its unique purpose unmistakable.

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?

'Use for local OVA files; for vSphere templates use deploy_vm_from_template, to copy an existing VM vm_clone' gives explicit when-to-use guidance and names the relevant alternatives. It also adds a practical caveat about upload time and a failure condition (datastore not found), helping an agent decide when this tool is appropriate.

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