boxes.display

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It reveals that the tool retrieves a display address in SPICE or VNC form and is intended for opening a viewer, which is meaningful. However, it does not mention whether the VM must be running, what the exact return format is, or whether any connection is initiated.

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 concise sentence that states the action, the target resource, and the practical use case. There is no redundant information and it is immediately useful.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, and the description conveys the essential purpose and output type (SPICE/VNC address). It is complete enough for an agent to know what to call, though a note on return format or preconditions would make it fully comprehensive.

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 already covers the only parameter (nameOrUuid) with 100% description coverage. The tool description does not add extra parameter semantics beyond 'Domain name or UUID', but since the schema is fully sufficient, a baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a concrete resource ('SPICE/VNC display address for VM'), clearly distinguishing the tool's output from sibling tools like boxes.screenshot (which captures screen pixels) and boxes.info (which returns general VM info). The phrase 'useful to open viewer' further clarifies why an agent would use this tool.

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 when to use it ('useful to open viewer') but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as boxes.screenshot or boxes.info. There is no when-not-to-use guidance or named sibling for comparison, so the agent must infer the intended use case.

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