esxi_get_vm

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile fully. The description adds only that lookup is by MoRef, which is modest context but does not raise the bar beyond what annotations provide. No mention of error behavior for invalid or missing vm_id.

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 that front-loads the identifier and the resource. Nothing is wasted, though there is no elaboration because there is essentially nothing else, and the language mismatch with the surrounding English tool names is a minor structural inconsistency.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. However, for a tool whose only parameter is undocumented in the schema and whose description provides just the word MoRef, the definition leaves the agent without guidance on obtaining a valid vm_id or on sibling selection. It is thinner than adequate for even a simple lookup.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%: the single required parameter vm_id has no description in the schema. The description partially compensates by clarifying that vm_id is a MoRef, but it offers no format example, no note on where the MoRef comes from (e.g., esxi_list_vms), and no indication of failure when it is omitted or invalid.

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 verb+resource (query a single VM's details) and names the key parameter (vm_id/MoRef). However, it is in Chinese while all sibling tool names and the schema are in English, and it makes no effort to distinguish itself from esxi_list_vms or esxi_vm_hardware, which occupy adjacent retrieval territory. The core purpose is understandable but not sharply differentiated.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. With siblings like esxi_list_vms and esxi_vm_hardware, an agent has no statement that this tool is for fetching one VM by MoRef rather than enumerating all VMs. The behavior is inferable from the name but not stated.

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