pdm_pve_qemu_power

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is a mutation, dry-run by default, returns a PLAN with live state/blast radius/risk, requires confirm=True to execute, and is task-backed with status='submitted'. This covers safety and workflow comprehensively.

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 very concise: two sentences front-loaded with the core purpose and workflow. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the two-phase process (plan vs submit) and task backing. However, it omits explanation for each action (start/stop/shutdown/resume) and the format of vmid/remote. It is nearly complete but could be more thorough for safe usage.

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 only 20% (only proximo_target has a description). The tool description mentions confirm=True but does not explain the meaning of vmid, action, remote, or their allowed values. With low schema coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not add sufficient detail for most parameters.

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?

Description clearly states it is a mutation for start/stop/shutdown/resume of a VM on a PDM-registered remote. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pdm_pve_lxc_power (for containers) and pve_guest_power (direct Proxmox) by specifying 'through PDM' and the remote context.

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 explains the dry-run pattern and confirm=True to submit, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like pve_guest_power or pdm_pve_lxc_power. It implicitly targets PDM-managed remotes, but no exclusions or comparative guidance are provided.

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