MCP cldkctl Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but offers none. It doesn't indicate whether this is a destructive operation, what permissions are required, whether it's idempotent, what happens if the VM is already on, or any error conditions. This is inadequate for a mutation tool.

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?

While technically concise with a single sentence, this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description doesn't front-load essential information and wastes its limited space on stating the obvious rather than providing value.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a nested object parameter, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to explain what the tool does beyond the name, provides no behavioral context, and offers no guidance on expected inputs or outputs.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100% with the parameter 'vm_turn_on_data' documented as 'VM turn on data'. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding of what data should be included.

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 'Call the cldkctl_turn_on_vm endpoint' is a tautology that restates the tool name with minimal added meaning. While 'turn on vm' implies powering on a virtual machine, it lacks specificity about what resource is being acted upon and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'cldkctl_reboot_vm' or 'cldkctl_vm_turn_on'.

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. There's no mention of prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or differentiation from similar VM power management tools in the sibling list, leaving the agent with no usage context.

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