resume_vm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral implications. It conveys that the tool changes VM state from paused to running, but it does not explain what happens if the VM is not paused, whether the operation is asynchronous, or any error conditions. This leaves important behavior undisclosed for a mutating operation.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple state-transition operation.

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?

For a simple tool, the description is minimally viable but incomplete. It does not specify when to use it (paused VM only), what the parameters refer to, or the expected outcome/errors. The lack of annotations and output schema means the description carries the full burden, and it falls short of providing complete context.

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 two parameters (node, vmid) with zero description coverage, and the description does not mention either. While the names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no additional meaning beyond the raw schema, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions. No format, constraints, or relationship between parameters is provided.

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 the tool's function: resuming execution of a paused QEMU virtual machine. The verb 'resume' and target 'paused QEMU virtual machine' make the purpose unambiguous and distinguish it from sibling tools like start_vm or stop_vm.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as start_vm (for stopped VMs) or pause_vm (the inverse operation). It does not state prerequisites (e.g., VM must be paused) or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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