exec_in_vm

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions execution in a running VM and combined output, but lacks details on timeouts, permission requirements, error handling, or what happens if the VM is not running.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the key action and output. Every word contributes meaning; no filler.

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 of executing commands inside a VM, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on required VM state, security implications, or output format beyond 'combined stdout/stderr', though an output schema exists.

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 0% description coverage. The tool description does not elaborate on the 'name' or 'command' parameters, leaving their purpose to inference. It adds no 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 the verb 'Execute', the resource 'shell command inside a running BSD/Illumos VM', and the output 'combined stdout/stderr'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like console_output (monitoring) and lifecycle tools.

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 says 'Useful for diagnostics and automation' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like the VM must be running.

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