migrate_container

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose effects. It mentions 'online' for live migration and 'restart' for non-live, but does not state that the container may become unavailable during migration, nor does it describe rollback or error behavior.

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 concise: one short sentence plus a parameter list. The list format is clear and scannable, though the overall structure is minimal.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are covered. However, the description lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., container must exist, target node must be in cluster), potential side effects, or usage scenarios. For a migration operation, this is incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides brief explanations for 'online' (Live migration) and 'restart' (Restart container after migration), but for 'node', 'vmid', 'target' it only restates the name. 'target_storage' is explained as 'Target storage mapping.' Adds some meaning but not deep.

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 'Migrate a container to another node,' which specifies the verb (migrate) and resource (container). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'migrate_vm' (for VMs) and 'bulk_migrate_guests' (bulk operation).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., live vs non-live migration, when to use bulk migration). The description lists parameters but does not explain prerequisites or context for choosing migration.

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