pve_node_startall

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses this is a mutation with medium risk, reversible, notes the HTTP method, and includes a smoke-confirm caveat about untested aspects. This goes beyond minimal to inform the agent of important behavioral traits.

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 tightly structured with each line serving a purpose: action+scope, risk/reversibility, param explanation, endpoint, and verification status. No wasted words; front-loaded with the mutation label.

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 complexity of a mutation tool with no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, risk, reversibility, parameters, endpoint, and output hint. It could mention prerequisites or default behavior for node, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 low (25%), but the description explains the crucial 'vms' parameter as an optional CSV of VMIDs and clarifies that 'confirm=True' is needed to execute. This adds significant meaning over the schema, though 'node' and 'confirm' basics are less detailed.

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 ('start') and resource ('all (or filtered) guests on a PVE node'), and distinguishes this tool from its inverse 'pve_node_stopall'. The action is unambiguous and well-defined.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use it ('Reversible — the inverse of pve_node_stopall'), how to execute (confirm=True), and filtering (vms param). It lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives beyond the inverse, but the context is clear.

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