get_vm

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It lists what the tool returns (power state, resources, network adapters, etc.) and is clear about the operation. It does not disclose permissions or side effects, but as a read-only operation, the description is adequate and transparent about outputs.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and outcome, followed by usage guidance. No unnecessary words, every sentence earns its place. Ideal conciseness.

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 is simple (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately explains what is returned and when to use it. It could mention that no side effects occur, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100% (one parameter with a description). The tool description mentions 'by its ext_id' but does not add additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline at 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get full metadata for a single VM by its ext_id', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_vms (which lists VMs) and power_* tools (which perform actions). The purpose is 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 explicitly says 'Use this when you have a specific VM ext_id and need detailed information about that VM.' This provides clear when-to-use context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternative tools, though the sibling context implies other tools for different needs.

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