Run Command in Guest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It does disclose the stdout return, automatic shell selection, and VMware Tools requirement, but it leaves unstated how failures are reported, whether stderr/exit codes are included, and the fact that arbitrary shell commands can modify guest state.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The main behavior is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds only necessary environmental and shell-selection details.

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 schema fully documents all parameters and the description covers prerequisites, output (stdout), and shell behavior, the tool is mostly complete to invoke correctly. The main missing context is failure/exit-code semantics and explicit differentiation from guest_run_program, but these are not critical for basic invocation.

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 already covers all parameters at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by clarifying that 'command' is a shell command rather than a program path and that the shell auto-selects based on guest OS type, which reinforces the 'shell' parameter behavior.

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 action: 'Execute a shell command inside the guest VM and return stdout.' It names a specific verb, resource, and expected output. The 'shell command' phrasing also helps distinguish it from the sibling guest_run_program.

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 gives useful prerequisites and context: guest credentials must be configured and VMware Tools must be running, and shell selection depends on guest OS. However, it does not explicitly explain when to use this tool over guest_run_program or provide exclusions or alternative routing.

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