pve_get_vm_pending

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 disclosing behavior. It describes the tool as performing a diff between live and stored config, which implies read-only behavior, but it does not explicitly state safety, permissions, or potential side effects. This is a moderate level of transparency.

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 that conveys the core purpose without any fluff or repetition. Every word earns its 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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is adequate to convey scope and purpose. The output schema presumably documents return values, so the description need not explain them. It could have briefly mentioned parameter usage, but overall it is complete enough.

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 has one required parameter (vm_name) with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not mention the parameter or provide any additional semantic detail, so it fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation. The parameter is only trivially inferable from the tool name.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it identifies the tool as retrieving config changes pending reboot for a VM, and clarifies that it returns a diff between live and stored config. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like pve_get_vm_config or pve_get_vm_status.

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 clear context that this tool is for viewing unapplied config changes (pending reboot), which implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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