pve_create_container

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

The description clearly labels it as a mutation, dry-run capability, asynchronous behavior with UPID return. This exceeds basic annotations (none provided). However, it does not discuss conflict handling or permissions.

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 with no wasted words. Front-loaded with mutation label and key behaviors. Efficient and clear.

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?

Covers mutation, dry-run, async, and UPID return. Lacks prerequisites, error cases, and permission details. Output schema exists but is not visible; return value is mentioned.

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?

With only 14% schema coverage, the description adds meaning to 'options' by listing example keys. Other parameters (vmid, node, confirm, storage, ostemplate) lack description, so the help is partial.

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 states 'create a new LXC container' with a specific verb and resource. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like pve_create_vm (for VMs) and other operations.

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 mentions dry-run by default and confirm=True, implying a validation workflow, but does not explicitly differentiate from alternatives like pve_create_vm or pve_restore. Usage context is implied but not spelled out.

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