console_ctrl_alt_delete

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful specificity by naming the exact Hyper-V secure-attention sequence, but it does not explain the guest-side consequences, authentication implications, or session effects beyond that.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted language. It gets directly to the operation and target.

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 simple one-parameter action and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate to identify the operation and target. However, for a destructive guest-level action it lacks practical context about consequences and parameter expectations.

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 0%, so the description would need to compensate by explaining the vm_name parameter. It only says 'to the guest' and does not clarify expected format, whether a name or ID is accepted, or whether the VM must be running.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it sends the Hyper-V secure-attention sequence to the guest. This clearly identifies the operation as Ctrl+Alt+Delete-style attention, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling console_press_keys or say when that specialized tool is preferred.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which sibling to use instead for key sequences. The description implies a use case through the term 'secure-attention sequence,' but it provides no actionable selection criteria.

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