pve_mapping_pci_update

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is a mutation, dry-run by default, and reads current config for 'plan honesty'. However, it omits details on auth requirements, side effects, or irreversibility, leaving some behavioral aspects unclear.

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 three concise sentences with no wasted words. The key action and safety disclaimer are front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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's complexity (6 parameters, mutation, no annotations) and the presence of an output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain return values, the 'plan honesty' concept, or confirm that the mapping must exist before updating.

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 17% description coverage (only proximo_target documented). The description adds no explanation of parameters like map, digest, or mapping_id, failing to compensate for the low schema coverage. It only hints at digest via 'reads current config'.

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 is a mutation to 'update a PCI cluster mapping', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create, delete, and list by the update action.

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 confirm flag for execution, providing a safe usage pattern. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., create or delete), nor does it mention prerequisites like the mapping needing to exist.

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