vm_power_on

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that an already-on VM is a no-op, that it returns a status string, and that its effects are relevant to guest tool readiness. This adds meaningful behavioral context without contradicting the annotations.

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?

Three short sentences carry high-signal information: the operation, the no-op behavior, and the practical usage context. There is no filler or repetition, and the key verb-action is 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?

For a tool with only two parameters, full schema coverage, and strong annotation hints, this description fully covers what an agent needs: what it does, when to call it, how it behaves on already-on VMs, and its relationship to other VM operations.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, documenting vm_name as the exact name and target as an optional config target with default behavior. The description adds no new parameter-specific details, so the schema-based baseline 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 states a specific action and resource: "Power on a virtual machine." It also clearly distinguishes this from its reverse operation by naming vm_power_off, so an agent can identify the tool's role among many VM-related siblings.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: "Call this first when a VM is off." It also references the relevant alternative (vm_power_off) and provides a concrete usage context by noting that guest tools depend on VMware Tools finishing boot.

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