hostodo_get_vm_command_output

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the output fields and mentions bounded tails (hinting at the tail param limits), but does not disclose possible states (e.g., if command is still running) or any additional behavioral traits like rate limits.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value. No redundant or unnecessary text.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains the return values (status, exit_code, tails, offsets) and references incremental reads. It could mention default tail byte values (schema shows 8192) for completeness, but overall it is adequately comprehensive for a tool with 4 params and async behavior.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra semantics beyond what the schema already provides for the parameters, merely hinting at bounded tails via the word 'bounded'.

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 tool retrieves status and bounded output tails for an async command, naming the specific return fields (status, exit_code, stdout/stderr tails, next offsets). It distinguishes from siblings like hostodo_start_vm_command and hostodo_read_vm_command_logs.

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 implies usage after starting an async command and references hostodo_read_vm_command_logs for incremental reads, providing helpful context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives for other scenarios.

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