get_vm_engine

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

The description's wording 'Информация о' aligns with the annotations readOnlyHint=true and no destructive hint, so there is no contradiction. It adds the endpoint name but does not disclose what specific engine details are returned or how the result should be interpreted, so behavioral context beyond annotations is minimal.

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 a single sentence with no filler; it front-loads the purpose and adds the endpoint in parentheses. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only tool, the description is adequate for an agent to invoke it safely, but it does not hint at the shape or content of the returned virtualization-engine information, and there is no output schema to fill that gap. Low complexity prevents a lower score, but some ambiguity about the result remains.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. Schema coverage is trivially 100%, and the zero-parameter baseline of 4 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?

The description clearly states the operation is about retrieving information about the virtualization engine and even includes the endpoint 'vm/get_engine'. It is distinguishable from sibling getters like get_vm_stats or get_server, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no when-not-to-use conditions, and no mention of sibling tools. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and general context.

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