resize_disk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must compensate. It only states the action without disclosing critical behavioral traits such as whether the operation is possible while the VM is running, if it preserves data, if resizing can both increase and decrease disk size, or any limits. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 sentence, which is concise but at the expense of necessary detail. It front-loads the purpose but omits usage and parameter context. While not verbose, it is not sufficiently informative for its length.

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 resizing a disk (potential data loss, prerequisites, size limits, effect on VM state) and the lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not cover what happens during the operation, how to verify success, or any side effects, making it inadequate for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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 2 parameters with only 50% coverage (vm has a description, sizeGB does not). The description adds no additional meaning: it does not explain that sizeGB is the new size in gigabytes, nor does it mention any constraints like minimum size or growth-only behavior. Baseline for low coverage is lower, and the description fails to compensate.

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 'Resize a VM's virtual disk' clearly states the action (resize) and the resource (VM's virtual disk). Among sibling tools, none directly relate to resizing a disk, so it distinguishes well from alternatives like clone_vm or update_vm.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The agent lacks context on whether the VM must be stopped, if resizing requires specific permissions, or if this tool is preferred over other VM modification tools.

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