get_vm

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

No annotations are provided, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond the action of getting, such as read-only nature, error behavior, or performance implications. The description carries the full burden but offers minimal disclosure.

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 concise and front-loaded, with a single clear sentence and an effective Args block. It avoids verbosity but the 'Args' formatting is standard and not wasteful.

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 tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema covers return values, and the parameter is explained. However, it omits any mention of error cases or when to use it, leaving minor gaps in 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?

The description explains that vm_id is a numeric ID obtained from list_vms, which adds meaningful context beyond the schema's bare property title. With schema description coverage at 0%, this description compensates well for the single parameter.

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 'Get detailed information about a specific virtual machine,' which identifies the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like list_vms (which lists all VMs) and get_vm_ips (which gets IPs), though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

Usage is implied: the description says the vm_id comes from list_vms, suggesting use after listing VMs, but it doesn't explicitly state when to choose this over other getter/sibling tools or provide exclusion criteria.

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