adb_qemu_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral aspects: showing status, resource usage, port mappings, and availability. It implies a read-only operation, though not explicitly stated. Could be improved by noting non-destructive nature.

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?

Single, well-structured sentence with front-loaded purpose ('Show status'). Every word adds value, zero redundancy.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the main outputs: running VMs, resource usage, port mappings, and KVM/QEMU availability. It lacks details on return format but is sufficient for typical usage.

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?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100% trivially. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds no extra parameter info because none are needed.

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 the verb 'Show' and resource 'status of QEMU virtual machines', detailing specific aspects like resource usage, port mappings, and KVM/QEMU availability. It distinguishes from sibling tools like adb_qemu_start or adb_qemu_stop.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While usage as a read-only status check is implied, the description does not mention exclusions or conditions that would help an agent decide between this and other QEMU tools.

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