restore_vm_backup

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'Restore a VM from backup' and does not mention that the operation is potentially destructive, what happens to existing VMs, whether it overwrites, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a restore operation.

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 six-word sentence with no filler or repetition. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and is as concise as possible, earning a top score for structure even though it lacks depth.

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 has 9 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what a restore entails (e.g., creating a new VM vs overwriting), how backupfile should be specified, or any prerequisites. This incompleteness could lead to incorrect usage.

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 100%, and the schema provides per-parameter descriptions, including an example for backupfile and an enum for format. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Restore a VM from backup' clearly states a specific verb (restore) and resource (a VM) with a source (backup). It distinguishes this tool from the sibling 'restore_container_backup' by explicitly mentioning VM, and from snapshot-restore tools by indicating a backup source.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_vm_backup, list_backups, or restore_container_backup. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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