get_vm_details

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

No annotations are present, and the description only states it 'gets' information, implying a read operation. It does not explicitly confirm read-only nature, authentication requirements, or potential side effects. Minimal disclosure beyond the operation type.

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: one sentence for purpose plus two lines for parameters. It is front-loaded with the core action and adds no unnecessary text. Every element is essential.

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 (which likely describes return values), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and parameters. It lacks mention of permissions or connectivity constraints, but for a straightforward get tool, this is nearly complete.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description's Args section adds critical meaning: 'hostname: vSphere hostname (e.g., vcenter.domain.local)' and 'vm_id: Virtual Machine ID or name'. This provides clarity and context beyond the bare schema property 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 clearly states 'Get detailed information about a specific virtual machine', specifying the action (get), resource (virtual machine), and scope (specific). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_vms (listing) and other get_* tools (different resources).

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 is provided. The description implies retrieval of details for a known VM, but does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it (e.g., if the VM ID is unknown, use list_vms first).

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