sylve_jail_migrate

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the word 'validate', leaving the important behaviors unstated: whether the CT is stopped/restarted, downtime, what happens if migration fails mid-transfer, and how wait/wait_timeout affect the call.

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 short sentence with no filler and the action front-loaded. It is terse rather than padded; the problem is under-specification, not verbosity.

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?

For a destructive migration operation with 7 parameters, no output schema, and three undocumented parameters, the description is far too thin. An agent cannot tell how failures are reported or how wait/timeout semantics apply without reading the schema and guessing.

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 coverage is only 57%, with wait, wait_timeout, and validate_only undocumented anywhere. The description does not explain these or resolve the confusing overlap between the required 'target' and the optional 'node' parameter (documented as 'omit for cluster-wide'), which looks like a genuine ambiguity an agent could get wrong.

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?

States a specific verb pair (validate and migrate) and resource (Jail) plus the destination scope (another cluster node). It clearly differs from sylve_vm_migrate by naming Jail, though it never explicitly contrasts the two.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. is the target node required to be drained or in the cluster?), and no mention of when to prefer validate_only or a different sibling. The agent must infer all of this from the parameter names.

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