start_vm

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral details, but it only states the action. It does not mention whether the operation is asynchronous, what happens if the VM is already running, or any permission requirements, leaving significant ambiguity for a mutation tool.

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 extremely compact—one action statement plus a single argument definition—with no redundancy or filler. It front-loads the core purpose immediately.

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 simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks details about side effects, preconditions, or relationships to sibling tools like resume_vm, making it only minimally complete.

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. The phrase 'The VM identifier' adds little beyond the schema's property name and type; it does not clarify the format, how to obtain it, or whether it's a name or UUID.

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 states a specific action ('Start') on a virtual machine, and specifies the valid target states ('stopped or suspended'), which clearly distinguishes it from read tools like get_vm and state-changing tools like shutdown_vm.

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 the tool is for VMs in stopped or suspended states, providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly reference alternatives or exclusions, such as the existence of resume_vm or reset_vm.

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