create_vm

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the VM is 'created stopped by default' and mentions the auto-start option, which is useful. However, it doesn't cover important behavioral aspects like required permissions, whether this is a long-running operation, error conditions, or what happens if resources are insufficient.

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 opening statement followed by organized parameter documentation. While comprehensive, it's appropriately sized for an 11-parameter tool. The only minor improvement would be front-loading more critical behavioral information before the parameter list.

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 (11 parameters, creation operation) and presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description provides good coverage. It explains the core functionality and documents all parameters thoroughly. The main gap is lack of behavioral context around permissions, errors, and resource constraints.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing detailed parameter documentation. Each parameter gets clear explanations, examples (e.g., '32G', 'local:iso/ubuntu-24.04.iso'), defaults, and usage context. The description adds substantial value beyond what the bare schema provides.

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 specific action ('Create a new QEMU virtual machine') and resource ('virtual machine'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like clone_guest, create_container, or list_vms. The opening sentence provides unambiguous purpose without being tautological.

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 about when to use this tool (to create a new VM) and mentions the 'start_after_create' parameter for auto-start behavior. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast when to use this versus alternatives like clone_guest or create_container, which would be needed for a perfect score.

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