get_vm_adapters

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return structure ('Returns MAC addresses, bridge assignments, NIC model...') but doesn't mention whether there are any side effects, permissions required, or VM state prerequisites. For a getter, the read-only nature is implied, but the description doesn't explicitly state it.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and return values in two concise sentences, followed by an Args line. No wasted words.

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 simple getter nature with one parameter and an output schema present, the description covers the core purpose and return values. It lacks caveats about VM state or empty results, but the tool is straightforward enough that this is acceptable.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, leaving the description to compensate. The Args section says 'vm_id: The VM identifier', which adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name. It doesn't specify format, constraints, or how to obtain the ID, leaving the description only slightly helpful.

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 specifies 'Get network adapters for a virtual machine' and lists exact return contents (MAC, bridge, NIC model, queue config), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_vm_ips and get_vm_graphics.

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 implies when to use it (when you need network adapter details) by listing what it returns, but it doesn't explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusion criteria. Sibling get_vm_ips is not referenced, so the guidance is contextual rather than explicit.

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