qemu_snapshot_restore

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, covering the mutation risk. The description adds useful context about the snapshot type and VM state requirement, but does not disclose what happens to the current disk state or that the restore is irreversible. With annotations covering the core safety profile, the extra context is moderate.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. The verb, object, and precondition are front-loaded, making the core information instantly accessible. Nothing extraneous is included.

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 destructive operation, the description states the action and precondition. However, given its destructive nature, the absence of any parameter details and lack of output expectation leaves meaningful gaps. The description is adequate but not rich enough to fully guide an agent without additional schema support.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not elaborate on either parameter. 'named' hints at the 'name' parameter and 'VM' implies 'vm_id', but there is no explanation of value formats, constraints, or which snapshot is targeted. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 ('Restore'), the resource ('named qcow2 internal disk snapshot'), and a key precondition ('while the VM is stopped'). This distinguishes it from snapshot creation/deletion/list tools, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like qemu_vm_restore.

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 provides clear context about when the tool is appropriate: the VM must be stopped. This is a meaningful usage condition. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use this tool in favor of qemu_vm_restore or snapshot deletion.

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