Run Parallels pre-flight doctor diagnostics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safe, non-mutating nature is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond those annotations by explaining the optional guest inspection path: checks guest OS, runtimes, and environment when a VM is specified.

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 purpose is front-loaded in a single sentence, and the Args block is compact and directly useful. There is no filler or repetition beyond the tool title.

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?

For a read-only diagnostic tool with only one optional parameter, an output schema, and strong annotations, the description is nearly complete. It covers host diagnostics, guest diagnostics when a VM is supplied, and the parameter format. It could be slightly more explicit about host-only behavior when vm is omitted, but that is reasonably inferred.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning. It does: 'vm' is optional, accepts a VM name or UUID, and triggers guest-side inspection when provided. This adds meaning the bare schema lacks, though it does not detail behavior when the VM is invalid or not found.

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 identifies the action ('Run diagnostic pre-flight checks') and the scope ('host macOS and Parallels setup, with optional guest inspection'). This distinguishes it from sibling mutations like vm_start or vm_delete and even from status-only tools like vm_status by emphasizing diagnostics and guest environment inspection.

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 term 'pre-flight checks' implies use before VM operations, but the description never explicitly says when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vm_status or vm_optimize_windows. It gives no when-not-to-use guidance or named alternative conditions.

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