move_vm_disk

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral context. It mentions key parameters like delete_original, which hints at destructive behavior, but does not disclose prerequisites (e.g., VM must be stopped), permissions, or side effects. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 clear and front-loaded with the purpose. The Args section is necessary due to low schema coverage, making it slightly longer but still efficient. Every sentence adds value.

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 existence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the two main operations and all parameters. However, it could mention when the operation is valid (e.g., VM state). Complete enough for most agents.

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 is essential. It provides meaningful explanations for all 7 parameters, such as 'disk: Source disk name (e.g. 'scsi0')' and 'storage: Target storage ID'. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 'Move a VM disk to different storage or attach to another VM,' using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like migrate_vm or resize_vm_disk, which handle different operations.

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 two distinct use cases (move to storage or attach to another VM) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like migrate_vm or move_container_volume. No exclusions or conditions are provided.

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