guest_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context by stating the data is read through PowerShell Direct, implying guest integration requirements, though it does not spell out those prerequisites or authentication needs.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that lists the returned data without filler or redundancy. Every clause contributes to identifying the tool's scope.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained in the description. The description covers what is read and the transport mechanism; the remaining gaps are PowerShell Direct preconditions and vm_name semantics.

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 should compensate for the undocumented vm_name parameter, but it never mentions the parameter, its expected format, or how to identify the VM. The parameter name is fairly self-explanatory, preventing a score of 1.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and enumerates the exact guest data returned: OS, boot time, memory, system-drive free space, and kernel debug settings. It also distinguishes itself from host-oriented siblings by specifying 'guest' and 'through PowerShell Direct'.

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 implies this is the tool for guest-level OS/status inspection, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of hyperv_host_status or guest_processes/guest_services/guest_events. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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