pve_reboot_vm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'via ACPI' which hints at graceful reboot behavior, but doesn't disclose critical details: whether this requires specific permissions, if it's destructive to VM state, what happens during timeout, or what the expected response/confirmation looks like. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 gets straight to the point. However, it could be slightly more front-loaded by including key behavioral context (e.g., 'Gracefully reboot...') rather than just technical implementation detail ('via ACPI').

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'reboot via ACPI' means operationally, what permissions are needed, what happens on failure, or what the tool returns. Given the complexity of VM management and lack of structured safety hints, more context is needed.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (node, vmid, timeout). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific context beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining what 'Node name' refers to or typical timeout values. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the action ('Reboot') and resource ('a virtual machine'), with specific technical detail ('via ACPI') that distinguishes it from other reboot methods. It differentiates from siblings like pve_reset_vm (hard reset) and pve_shutdown_vm (shutdown instead of reboot).

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like pve_reset_vm or pve_shutdown_vm. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., VM must be running), nor does it explain what 'via ACPI' means in practical terms for tool selection.

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