Clone Parallels VM

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, covering the mutation aspect. The description adds detail about linked vs full clone (sharing base disk), which is a behavioral nuance. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like requiring the source VM to remain for linked clones or any cleanup implications, leaving some gap beyond annotations.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then follows a tidy args block. Every sentence adds value: the purpose sentence, and each parameter's role. No fluff; compact and scannable.

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?

All parameters are explained, and an output schema exists to cover return details. It lacks explicit notes on prerequisites (e.g., source VM existence, disk space) or error conditions, but these are minor and can be inferred. Given the output schema and annotation coverage, this is nearly complete.

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%, so the description fully compensates. Each parameter is explicitly explained: vm (source name/UUID), name (clone name), linked (default and its functional difference), dst (optional custom path). This goes well beyond the schema's bare type definitions.

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?

Clearly states the action (clone), the resource (existing VM), and the purpose (sandboxes/disposable test environments). The verb is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like vm_start or vm_delete.

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?

Provides explicit context for when to use: 'to quickly spin up sandboxes or disposable test environments.' Does not mention alternatives, but no sibling does an equivalent operation, so the guidance is adequate. Lacks explicit 'when not to use', but that is acceptable given the niche.

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