pve_suspend_vm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Suspend' implies a state change (likely from running to paused/hibernated), but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires specific permissions, if it's reversible (via resume tools), potential side effects, or rate limits. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 with zero waste—'Suspend a virtual machine' is front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 this is a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters, the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context (e.g., reversibility, permissions), usage guidelines, and any mention of return values or errors, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an agent.

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 4 parameters (node, vmid, todisk, skiplock). The description adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides—it doesn't explain parameter interactions or implications (e.g., 'todisk' for hibernation vs. memory-only suspend). 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 'Suspend a virtual machine' clearly states the action (suspend) and target (virtual machine), which is a specific verb+resource. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'pve_suspend_container' (for containers) or 'pve_stop_vm' (different power state), leaving the purpose somewhat vague in context.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., VM must be running), exclusions, or comparisons to similar tools like 'pve_stop_vm' or 'pve_shutdown_vm', leaving the agent with no usage context.

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