update_cpu_vm

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose important behavioral details for a mutation operation. It does not state whether changes require a reboot, are hot-pluggable, or have side effects, leaving the agent unprepared for potential impacts.

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, efficient sentence with no redundant wording. It is appropriately sized but lacks the depth needed to compensate for missing structured metadata.

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 moderate complexity of 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is severely under-specified. It omits essential usage context, parameter explanations, and behavioral considerations, making it inadequate for safe and correct tool invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters but only hints at 'cores' and 'sockets'. It does not clarify the meaning or usage of cpu, numa, vcpus, node, or vmid, leaving most parameters undefined for the agent.

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 a specific action ('Update') on a specific resource ('CPU core and socket allocation of a virtual machine'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_memory_vm and resize_vm_disk. The verb and resource are unambiguous.

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 versus other update tools. It does not mention prerequisites, such as whether the VM must be stopped, or any conditions that would recommend this tool over alternatives.

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