proxmox-execute-vm-command

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the description carries the burden of operational detail. It adds meaningful constraints: command parsing into argv arrays, guest agent prerequisite, and no shell features. It does not disclose return/output or exit-code behavior, but the operational boundaries it provides are valuable.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose first, then the key prerequisite, then the command-format limitation. Every sentence earns its place and the most important selection information is front-loaded.

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?

Covers prerequisites, command parsing, and unsupported shell features well, but this is a mutating execution tool with no output schema, so the description should say what the caller gets back (stdout, exit code, timeout result). That omission prevents an agent from fully anticipating the outcome of the call.

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 100%, with the command, timeout, vmid, and node parameters already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the command semantics with examples, but adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: executing a command inside a running VM via the QEMU guest agent. The VM vs. container framing distinguishes it from the sibling proxmox-execute-container-command without needing to open the schema.

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?

Clear context is provided: the VM must have the QEMU guest agent installed and running, and shell features like pipes/redirects are unsupported. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool for containers or state when this tool should not be used.

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