Run Program in Guest

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: the dependency on VMware Tools, the no_wait option's effect on return timing, and that it returns program output or confirmation. Annotations provide no safety hints (all false), so the description carries the transparency burden and handles it well, though it could mention side effects like process execution in the guest.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, a requirements note, a bullet-like Args list, and a Returns section. It is succinct, front-loaded, and every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 7-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: purpose, prerequisite (VMware Tools), parameter meanings, and return behavior. It does not explain error scenarios or whether the VM must be running, but these are reasonable gaps given the tool's specificity and the sibling 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with all parameters documented. The description repeats most parameter meanings but adds contextual detail like 'Full path' and 'Arguments to pass'. However, it omits the vm_password parameter from its Args list, though the schema covers it. This provides marginal added value beyond the schema.

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 'Run a program inside a VMware Fusion guest OS' with a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like fusion_start_vm or fusion_list_snapshots, which cover different operations.

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?

Provides clear context by noting 'Requires VMware Tools to be installed and running in the guest' and listing the function's purpose. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling tools are semantically distinct, so usage is unambiguous.

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