hmc_backup_vios

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the execution method (SSH command), the exact CLI call, the data source for vios_uuid, the accepted backup_type values, and the output behavior (raw CLI output). It lacks explicit side effects or permission requirements, but covers the main behavioral aspects.

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 front-loaded with the purpose, uses a code block for the command, and a bullet list for enum values. No wasted words; every sentence provides 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 backup creation tool, the description provides the command, parameter meanings, output behavior, and follow-up step (polling list_vios_backups). Even with an output schema present, it is self-sufficient and complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 description fully compensates. It explains vios_uuid (VIOS UUID from hmc_vios) and elaborates each backup_type enum value with what it backs up, including the default. This is very helpful beyond the bare schema.

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 tool creates a VIOS backup via the HMC CLI, using a specific command. It distinguishes from related tools like hmc_list_vios_backups (lists backups) and hmc_restore_vios (restores backups).

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?

Provides clear context for when to use (to create a backup) and prerequisite info (vios_uuid from hmc_vios). It also instructs polling hmc_list_vios_backups to confirm completion. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is well-defined.

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