vmware_get_vm

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds valuable context about the return structure and fields, going beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The first sentence lists key items, the second specifies the structured object. Information is front-loaded and every word 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 presence of an output schema (though not shown), the description provides sufficient overview of return fields. The parameter is well-documented, annotations cover safety, and sibling tools are contextually irrelevant. No gaps remain.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single required parameter 'vm', with description 'Exact name or MoID (e.g. vm-123) of the VM'. The description does not add further parameter info but the baseline is 3 due to high schema coverage; however, the schema description itself is clear, and the tool description reinforces the scope, justifying a 4.

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 it provides 'Full details of a VM' listing specific components (config, CPU/RAM, disks, NICs, guest IPs, snapshots). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vmware_list_vms which likely only return summaries or lists, and from other get tools focusing on different entities.

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 retrieving detailed information about a single VM, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., vmware_list_vms for listing). No exclusions 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.