get_vm_pending

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or safe. It provides no details on authentication, rate limits, or side effects, though the name implies it is read-only.

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: a single-line purpose followed by a clean arg listing. Every sentence is essential, and the information is front-loaded with no redundant text.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose and parameters. It does not need to detail return values. The context of sibling tools is extensive, but the description sufficiently differentiates this tool by focusing on 'pending' changes.

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 coverage is 0%, meaning the schema has no parameter descriptions. The arg docstring provides minimal descriptions ('The node name.' and 'The VM ID.'), which adds some meaning beyond the bare property titles but is still basic. It does not specify constraints (e.g., valid node names, VM ID range).

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 retrieves pending configuration changes for a VM, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('pending changes'). It also includes the qualifier 'not yet applied,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_vm_config (applied config) and get_vm_status (runtime status).

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 the tool is for viewing unapplied changes via 'not yet applied,' but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_vm_config or get_vm_status. No when-not guidance or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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