pve_update_ha_resource

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Update HA resource' implies a mutation operation but does not specify permissions required, whether changes are destructive or reversible, rate limits, or error handling. It lacks critical context for safe and effective use, though it doesn't contradict any 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 extremely concise with just two words, but this brevity leads to under-specification rather than efficiency. It is front-loaded but fails to provide necessary context, making it inadequate despite its short length.

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 updating HA resources with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not cover behavioral aspects, return values, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for the agent to understand the tool's full context.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with all parameters well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining interactions between parameters or usage examples. This meets the baseline score of 3 since the 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 'Update HA resource' is a tautology that restates the tool name 'pve_update_ha_resource' without adding specificity. It mentions the resource type (HA) but lacks details on what aspects are updated or how it differs from sibling tools like 'pve_update_ha_group' or 'pve_create_ha_resource'. This provides minimal guidance beyond the name itself.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, and fails to differentiate it from related tools in the sibling list (e.g., 'pve_update_ha_group' or 'pve_get_ha_resource'). This leaves the agent with no usage direction.

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