vsphere_migrate_vm

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

Annotations indicate the operation is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive. The description adds beyond this by stating that write permission is required, and it explains the wait and timeout behaviors. This provides meaningful context about the operation's side effects and prerequisites.

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 well-organized: a one-sentence purpose, a concise explanation of migration variants, a short permission note, and a structured Args list. It is thorough without being verbose, and every sentence adds value. The key info is front-loaded.

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 there. The description covers the main usage modes, required permission, and the minimum target requirement. It could mention edge cases (e.g., resource_pool-only migration) or potential prerequisites like powered-on state, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description's Args section fully compensates. Each parameter gets a clear explanation: vm accepts multiple identifier forms, host/datastore/resource_pool are destinations, priority schedules the migration, wait controls blocking, and timeout_seconds overrides the default. This goes well beyond type names.

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 opens with 'Move a virtual machine to another host, datastore or resource pool,' which clearly states the specific action and resource. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like clone_vm or delete_vm by focusing on migration, and it explains the three migration types explicitly.

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 gives concrete guidance: supplying host performs vMotion, datastore performs storage vMotion, and both at once is combined migration. It also states that at least one target is required, which is essential. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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