start_container

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

Annotations indicate mutation and non-destructiveness, but the description adds the risk level requirement, which is additional behavioral context. It does not explain idempotency or state prerequisites, but the added info is valuable.

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 very concise with two sentences, no filler, and immediately conveys the action and a critical requirement. 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 lifecycle action, the description is fairly complete, especially with the risk level hint. However, it could mention prerequisites (e.g., container must be stopped) or error conditions to be fully self-contained.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters, so the description does not add new semantic information beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Start') and resource ('LXC container'), distinguishing it from sibling 'start_vm' for VMs. It is concise and specific.

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 a usage requirement ('Requires PROXMOX_RISK_LEVEL=lifecycle'), which guides when the tool can be used. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., if container is already running) or alternatives.

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