esxi_list_vms

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious context not present in structured fields: that memory fields are configured values, not physical usage, which prevents misinterpretation of returned data.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, with the primary action front-loaded and the data-interpretation caveat following. Nothing is redundant.

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 return structure needn't be explained. For a read-only list tool with annotations carrying the safety profile, the description covers purpose, filtering, and the key data caveat; only explicit sibling routing is missing.

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%, but the two parameters are self-describing (ip_filter, name_filter) with titles. The description confirms both filters exist and apply to the listing, adding marginal meaning, but gives no format or matching-behavior detail (substring vs exact, wildcards).

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?

States a specific verb (列出) and resource (VM), plus the filtering scope. It is clearly distinguishable from mutation siblings like esxi_power_vm or esxi_delete_vm, though it does not explicitly contrast with read siblings such as esxi_get_vm or esxi_inventory.

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?

Usage is implied: list all VMs, optionally narrowed by name/IP. There is no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-alternative guidance (e.g. use esxi_get_vm for a single VM's details), so the agent must infer routing 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.