pve_guest_config_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses read-only behavior and the return type (complete config dict). However, it lacks details on error handling, authorization requirements, or behavior for invalid VMIDs. This is adequate but not rich.

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 sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose declaration and usage guidance with rollback hint. It is front-loaded, free of fluff, and every sentence 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?

Given 4 input parameters (1 required), an output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main operation, return contents, and sibling tool relationships. It could mention default parameter values (e.g., kind default is 'lxc'), but overall it is complete enough for a read-only tool.

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 25%. The description adds value by explaining the 'kind' parameter's purpose (lxc or qemu) and implying that vmid identifies the guest. However, it does not detail the format of vmid or node, so it partially compensates for the low schema coverage.

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 verb 'Read', the resource 'guest's current configuration', and the scope 'kind='lxc' or 'qemu' (read-only)'. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools pve_guest_config_set and pve_guest_config_revert, providing a complete and specific purpose.

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 advises when to use the tool: to read a guest's configuration. It directs mutation to pve_guest_config_set and rollback to pve_guest_config_revert. While it does not list explicit exclusions, the context and sibling references provide clear usage boundaries.

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