get_virtual_machine

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read operation but does not disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, side effects, authentication requirements, or performance considerations.

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 a single sentence with a colon-separated list, efficient with no redundant words. However, it could be structured with bullet points for better readability.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers key aspects of the VM but misses details like prerequisites (e.g., VM must exist) or error conditions.

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 input schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), and the description adds no explanation of the parameters (name, cluster, namespace), leaving their meaning and usage ambiguous.

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 VM info' and lists specific categories (running state, resources, interfaces, disks, conditions), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_virtual_machines (which lists VMs) and start/stop/restart actions.

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 usage for retrieving detailed information about a single VM but does not explicitly state when to use it instead of alternatives like list_virtual_machines, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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