update_vm

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

With no annotations, the description fails to disclose important behavioral traits such as whether the update requires the VM to be stopped, if changes are live-applied, return value, or error conditions. 'Update' implies mutation but lacks detail.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the primary action and provides examples. It is concise without being overly terse, though it could include more context without much 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 no output schema, no annotations, and three parameters (one required), the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavior for running VMs, prerequisite states, error handling, and return values.

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 only 33%. The description mentions 'CPU, memory, etc.' which hints at cpu and memoryMB but provides no additional semantics like valid ranges, units, or behavior when omitted. The 'vm' parameter is already described in schema.

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 ('Update') and the resource ('VM's configuration'), with examples (CPU, memory, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like clone_vm, start_vm, or resize_disk.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that disk changes require a separate sibling tool, or that some configurations may require the VM to be stopped.

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