Update VM config

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

Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context: HIGH RISK requires confirmation, only safe allowlist, and support for running VMs via current=true. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences plus a warning. Each sentence is purposeful, front-loads the action, and provides critical constraints without redundancy.

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?

Covers usage, risk, key restrictions, and the current flag. Lacks output description but patch tools typically return nothing; however, for completeness, mentioning response would improve.

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 descriptions cover 60% including config, confirm, current. Node and vmid lack descriptions but are standard. The description does not add new information beyond schema for these 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?

The description clearly states it patches VM configuration keys, lists examples like cores, memory, scsi0 size, net0, ostype, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update_container_config by specifically targeting VM config.

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 when to use (patching config keys) and warns against using for certain key types, but does not explicitly mention that dedicated tools like resize_vm_disk exist for specific changes, leaving room for confusion.

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