pve_sdn_vnet_update

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

With no annotations, the description does a good job disclosing mutation behavior: pending state, dry-run default, confirm effect, risk level (RISK_LOW, no live network effect). It also mentions return plan/status. Minor omission: no mention of required permissions or concurrency details beyond lock_token parameter.

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 concise (4 sentences) and front-loaded with 'MUTATION' and purpose. Every sentence adds value, but could be slightly more structured with whitespace or bullet points for readability.

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 7 parameters, 1 required, presence of output schema, and many siblings, the description covers core behavior, lifecycle (pending/apply), and alternatives. It doesn't explain return values in detail, but output schema exists. Missing minor operational details like error handling or idempotency.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by grouping parameters ('options sets fields, delete removes keys') and listing example fields (tag/alias/vlanaware), but does not significantly extend beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 'update an SDN vnet' as a mutation, and distinguishes from sibling tools pve_sdn_vnet_create and pve_sdn_vnet_delete by name and action. The verb 'update' and resource 'SDN vnet' are specific.

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?

Explicitly says it's a mutation pending until pve_sdn_apply, defaults to dry-run, and defines confirm=True stages the edit. Also directs to pve_sdn_vnet_create for creation and pve_sdn_vnet_delete for removal, providing clear when-to-use guidance.

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