env_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses boot order (disk first, DVD second), the lack of a golden image and credentials, the fact that env_exec will not work, and the behavior of env_revert resetting the blank disk and restarting the install.

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?

Every sentence serves a purpose: purpose, boot behavior, missing credentials, drive workflow, and post-install promotion. The description is dense but well-structured, front-loading the core use case and then explaining consequences and next steps.

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 the tool's complexity and lack of annotations, the description is complete: it explains what is created, the boot/install flow, why env_exec won't work, how to interact during installation, and what to do afterward. An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required here.

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%, so the schema already documents all six parameters. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by clarifying that iso_path is on the host where the server runs, and by tying disk_gb to the concept of a blank dynamic disk.

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: create a blank environment with an installation ISO in its DVD drive and boot it. It clearly targets OSes with no recipe and no unattended installer, distinguishing this from generic environment creation and from related sibling tools.

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?

Explicitly says when to use this tool: for an OS with no recipe and no unattended installer. It also routes the agent through follow-up tools like env_screenshot, env_type, env_keys, env_click, env_revert, env_promote, and golden_adopt, and warns that env_exec will not work on the result.

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