create_container

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

The annotation destructiveHint: false is consistent with creation, but the description does not disclose any behavioral details beyond the act of creating. Important aspects like whether the container is started automatically, permission requirements, or side effects on resources are omitted, leaving gaps for an agent relying solely on the description.

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 concise (three words), front-loading the essential action. While it could be slightly more informative, it avoids any fluff or repetition. However, for a tool with many parameters, a bit more context would be beneficial without harming conciseness.

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 (13 parameters, no output schema, many sibling tools), the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return values, side effects (e.g., what happens on success/failure), or how it differs from create_vm. The agent would need to rely heavily on the schema and external knowledge.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, all 13 parameters have their own descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no new meaning or examples beyond what the schema already provides, so it adds no extra value. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create LXC container' clearly states the verb (Create) and resource (LXC container), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_vm (for virtual machines). It is specific enough for an agent to understand the core action, though adding context (e.g., Proxmox platform) would enhance clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., clone_vm or create_vm_snapshot), nor any prerequisites such as having a template or node ready. The agent must infer usage from context alone.

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