get_guest_config

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

Annotations already convey readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by clarifying that omitted fields are not unset, which can prevent a costly misunderstanding for an agent reading a partial configuration summary.

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 a single, tight sentence. The primary action is front-loaded, and the important behavioral caveat ('omitted fields are not unset') is appended without verbosity. Every word earns its place.

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 simple read-only tool with a full output schema and safety annotations, the description is reasonably complete. The main gap is the lack of any usage context or alternate-tool guidance, but the core behavior and non-destructive nature are adequately conveyed.

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 0%, so the description needs to compensate by explaining parameters, but it does not mention node, vmid, or guest_type at all. The parameter names and enum are somewhat self-explanatory, but no additional semantic meaning is provided beyond the schema itself.

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 states a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('allowlisted configuration summary'), which clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_guest_status or list_guests. However, the term 'allowlisted' is not explained, leaving some ambiguity about what exactly is included or excluded.

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 versus alternatives such as get_guest_status or list_guests. There is no mention of prerequisites, when a configuration summary is appropriate, or when another tool should be preferred.

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