get_next_vmid

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns the next available VMID and explains the parameter, but does not disclose whether it is read-only, requires any permissions, or has side effects. For a simple query tool, this is acceptable but minimal.

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 extremely concise, using two sentences without any redundant or superfluous information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently covers the parameter.

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 a single parameter and an output schema (noted in context), the description is complete. It covers the tool's function and the parameter's behavior. The existence of an output schema means return value documentation is not required.

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 description adds meaning to the single parameter 'vmid', explaining that 0 means auto-assign. With schema description coverage at 0%, this is essential. It compensates well for the lack of schema documentation, though it could also mention any constraints or valid ranges.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get the next available VMID in the cluster.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('VMID'), distinguishing it from other listing tools like list_vms or get_vm_config. However, it could be slightly more explicit about its use case (e.g., for VM creation).

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 checking VM ID availability but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_vms or get_vm_config. While the tool is unique among siblings, no when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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