get_vm_interfaces

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the critical constraint 'requires guest agent', which is useful. However, it fails to mention what happens when the agent is missing (e.g., error vs empty list) or what the return data includes, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the core purpose and appends the crucial prerequisite, making it maximally efficient while still informative.

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?

The tool is simple with only two well-documented parameters and no output schema. The description adequately identifies the operation and a key prerequisite, but it does not specify what the returned interface data looks like (e.g., list of IP/MAC), which would be helpful given the lack of an output schema. It is adequate but leaves a notable gap.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (node and vmid) with 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or clarify parameter usage beyond what the schema gives, so it neither enhances nor detracts from the schema information.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('network interfaces from a VM'), making its purpose specific and distinct from sibling tools like get_vm_status or set_vm_ip. The added prerequisite 'requires guest agent' further scopes the operation.

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 mentions the guest agent requirement, which is a clear prerequisite and implicitly tells the agent not to use this tool if the guest agent is not running. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when to prefer this tool over related ones, so guidance is only implied.

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