vm agent get users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns users inside the guest, but doesn't elaborate on behavior like empty results, pagination, or errors. It meets the minimum but adds little beyond annotations.

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?

The description is one sentence of five words, extremely concise with no unnecessary information. Every word contributes to the core purpose.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should hint at the return format (e.g., list of usernames, JSON structure). It does not. For a simple tool, the description is too sparse to fully guide an agent, missing prerequisites and output details.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. However, it does not explain what 'node' or 'vmid' mean or their expected formats. While parameter names are somewhat intuitive, the description fails to add meaningful semantic context for the 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 the action 'Return logged-in users' and the resource 'inside the guest', distinguishing it from other vm_agent_get_* tools that target different guest information (e.g., hostname, OS info).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool, what prerequisites exist (e.g., QEMU guest agent must be running), or when to consider alternatives. It lacks any usage context or exclusions.

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