qemu_vm_status

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds a critical behavioral detail beyond these: the VM is locked by this session and requires vm_unlock. This is a side effect not captured by the annotations, and it is clearly disclosed.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently states what the tool does and includes a necessary behavioral caveat. Every phrase contributes value, with no filler or redundancy.

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 read-only tool with strong annotations and a single parameter, the description covers the essential state being read and the lock semantics. However, with no output schema, it does not describe the return format or fields, which is a minor gap but not critical given the simplicity and available annotations.

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 schema has one parameter vm_id with 0% description coverage, and the tool description makes no mention of it. The description should compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation, but it does not. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Read' and clearly identifies the resource: 'one managed QEMU VM's process, QMP, and guest TCP transport state.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like qemu_vm_list (which lists VMs) and qemu_vm_metrics (which likely focuses on metrics), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use it: to read status of a single VM. It also provides an important usage instruction: 'VM remains locked by this session; call vm_unlock when finished.' While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the context and sibling list make that less necessary.

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