get_vm_ips

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It discloses the QEMU guest agent dependency, which is a significant runtime requirement. However, it does not mention failure modes (e.g., if the agent is not running), return format, or data freshness—though the latter may be covered by the output schema.

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 relatively compact: one purpose sentence, a prerequisite sentence with install command, and an Args block. The install command is long but directly relevant to the tool's operation. The structure is logical and front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 tool with a single parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and a critical prerequisite. It lacks guidance on alternative tools and error handling, but given the tool's simplicity, it is reasonably complete. The output schema handles return value documentation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It defines vm_id only as 'The VM identifier,' which adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name itself. It does not explain how to obtain the vm_id (e.g., via list_vms) or any formatting constraints. The description's coverage is insufficient for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 opens with a clear verb+resource: 'Get the IP addresses assigned to a virtual machine.' This is specific and distinguishes the tool from most siblings, though it could explicitly contrast with get_vm_adapters or get_vm which may also surface IPs. It clearly identifies the target resource via vm_id.

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 a key prerequisite: the QEMU guest agent must be installed and running, with an installation command. It does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it reference sibling tools like get_vm or list_vms. Usage context is implied (when IPs are needed) but not explicitly scoped.

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