pve_get_vm_disks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states the action and the data included, without mentioning read-only semantics, authentication requirements, error behavior, or side effects. The verb 'Get' weakly implies non-mutation, but that is not explicitly stated, and no other behavioral traits are disclosed.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently communicates the core purpose and the key items returned (storage pool, path, size), earning every word's place.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, return values need not be elaborated. However, the description lacks usage guidance, parameter semantics, and behavioral context, leaving an agent without enough information to confidently invoke the tool among the many similar pve_get_* siblings. It is a minimally adequate but notably incomplete description.

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 provides no description for the vm_name parameter (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It only says 'for a specific VM', which connects the parameter to the tool's purpose but does not clarify whether vm_name is a name or ID, nor any format or constraints. The parameter semantics are therefore only minimally enriched beyond the schema itself.

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 tool retrieves the disk/storage layout for a specific VM, listing the storage pool, path, and size per disk. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pve_get_storage and pve_get_node_disks by explicitly scoping to a single VM and specifying the exact information returned.

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 phrase 'for a specific VM' gives some context for when to use this tool, implying it is for per-VM disk queries rather than host-level storage. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like pve_get_vm_config, which might also include disk information. This leaves some ambiguity in tool selection.

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