Clone VM

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

Description adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate mutability (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness. However, description does not disclose important details like whether source VM must be stopped, how clone is created, or success/failure conditions.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose, but it's efficiently structured.

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 tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain the difference between full and linked clones, constraints, or what the operation entails. Incomplete for a complex operation.

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 100% (all 9 parameters documented in schema). Description does not add any additional parameter information beyond what's in schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'Full or linked clone of an existing VM', specifying both the action (clone) and the resource (VM), and distinguishes between clone types. This differentiates it from sibling tools like 'clone_container' or 'create_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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., migrate_vm, create_vm). Does not mention prerequisites like VM state or permissions, nor when to choose full vs linked clone.

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