Create snapshot

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false (write) and destructiveHint=false (non-destructive). Description adds behavior about optional RAM state and its limitation to QEMU. However, it omits important behavioral traits like prerequisites (VM running for RAM snapshot), storage impact, or that creating a snapshot may temporarily pause I/O.

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 conveying the core purpose efficiently. No redundant or filler words.

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 write tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks critical context: when to include RAM state (VM must be running?), any requirements on the node, what happens after creation (success/error response), and the relationship with other snapshot tools. Annotations cover safety but not completeness.

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 high (83%), so baseline is 3. Description 'optionally including RAM state' implicitly relates to the vmstate parameter but does not add new meaning beyond schema descriptions. No additional constraints or contexts are given for parameters.

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 the action ('Take a snapshot'), the resource ('QEMU VM or LXC container'), and a distinctive feature ('optionally including RAM state'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like delete_snapshot and list_snapshots.

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?

Usage is implied ('take a snapshot'), but no explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., rollback_snapshot, backup tools). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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