pve_mapping_pci_create

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden. It labels the tool as MUTATION, describes the dry-run behavior, and the confirm parameter to execute. This is good transparency for a creation tool.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, each adding value. It is front-loaded with the purpose and key behaviors, wasting no words.

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?

While the description covers mutation, dry-run, and confirmation, it lacks details on parameter meanings (map, description) and does not describe the return value or side effects. Given the output schema exists, the description could be more complete, but overall it is minimally adequate.

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 5 parameters with only 20% description coverage (only 'proximo_target' is described). The description only mentions 'confirm' and implies 'mapping_id' is needed but does not explain 'map', 'description', or the format of 'mapping_id'. For a create tool, this leaves ambiguity.

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 it creates a PCI cluster passthrough mapping, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete, list, and update.

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 default and confirmation requirement, and mentions a smoke-confirm pattern for testing. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, though the context of create vs. other operations is implied.

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