qemu_media_mount

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

Annotations already indicate mutability (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing that the VM remains locked and instructing to call vm_unlock, which goes beyond the structured annotations. It also notes persistence across starts, which is not evident from the schema.

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 two concise sentences, front-loads the primary action, and includes necessary constraints without any fluff. 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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action, the VM running condition, persistence, and the lock/unlock lifecycle. It lacks details about possible failure modes or relationship to other media operations, but is reasonably complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 0% for both parameters, and the description does not explain vm_id or media_id. It only mentions 'managed ISO', which hints at media_id but does not describe the parameters' format or role. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Mount') with a clear resource ('managed ISO') and scope ('when the VM is running and persist it for future starts'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like qemu_media_eject (ejects) and qemu_media_set_boot (sets boot order).

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 states when to use the tool ('when the VM is running') and provides a required follow-up action ('call vm_unlock when finished'). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the lock/unlock context gives clear operational guidance.

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