pve_resize_vm_disk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. 'Resize VM disk' indicates a mutation operation but lacks critical details: it does not specify if the VM must be stopped, if data is preserved, potential risks (e.g., data loss), or typical outcomes (e.g., success/failure indicators). The description is minimal and fails to convey necessary operational context.

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 extremely concise ('Resize VM disk'), consisting of three words that directly convey the core action. It is front-loaded with no unnecessary elaboration, making it efficient and easy to parse. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness, as noted in other dimensions.

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 complexity of a disk resizing operation (a mutation with potential data implications), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavioral aspects (e.g., VM state requirements, safety), usage context, and expected results. The high schema coverage does not compensate for these gaps in operational guidance.

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%, with all parameters documented in the input schema (e.g., 'size' as 'New size (e.g., +10G, 50G)'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining parameter interactions or constraints. Since the schema provides full coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description does not compensate but also does not detract.

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 'Resize VM disk' clearly states the verb ('Resize') and resource ('VM disk'), making the purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about what 'resize' entails (e.g., increasing or decreasing capacity) and does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'pve_resize_container_disk', which performs a similar operation for containers instead of VMs.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., VM state, permissions), exclusions (e.g., when not to resize), or refer to related tools like 'pve_move_vm_disk' or 'pve_resize_container_disk' for context. Usage is implied only by the tool name and parameters.

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