resize_container_disk

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'extend', implying a non-destructive capacity increase. It does not state whether the container must be stopped, if the operation is reversible, or any side effects on running containers. This leaves critical behavior undisclosed.

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 a single concise sentence with no redundant wording. It is front-loaded with the key action and object, though it sacrifices critical details that could be included without becoming verbose.

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 tool has 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, a one-sentence description is inadequate. It omits prerequisites, side effects, and how this differs from VM disk resize, leaving too much unsaid for safe and correct use.

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?

Input schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides a vague hint that 'rootfs' is one possible disk target, but it does not explain the 'size' format, the meaning of 'node' and 'vmid', or that 'disk' defaults to 'rootfs'. This is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 states a specific action ('Extend') and resource ('rootfs or disk capacity of an LXC container'), making it clear what the tool does. It also implicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'resize_vm_disk' by specifying LXC container, avoiding confusion with VM disk 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or when to prefer a different operation such as updating container resources or adding a new disk. The context is implied only by the tool's name.

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