save_vm_state

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the key side effect that the VM is stopped and its state persisted. It omits important behavior: whether the saved state can later be resumed via start_vm, whether it frees host memory, and any preconditions (VM must be running, guest-tools needs).

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, immediately conveying action and effect. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves little room for the contextual guidance an agent would benefit from.

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 one-parameter state-changing operation with a fully described schema and no output schema, the essential information (persist state and stop) is present. Missing are restore/resume semantics and preconditions, which are relevant but secondary for calling the tool correctly.

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 single 'vm' parameter is fully documented in the schema as name or UUID, so the description need not repeat it. It adds no extra meaning such as accepted identifier formats, ambiguity resolution, or error behavior for unknown VMs, leaving the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb (save) and resource (VM state), plus the concrete effect ('to disk and stop it'), which separates it from shutdown_vm, poweroff_vm, and pause_vm in the sibling list. It does not name those siblings explicitly, so differentiation is inferential rather than spelled out.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of the alternatives an agent must choose between (pause, shutdown, poweroff, discard_saved_state). Usage is only implied by the stated effect.

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