Guest config

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

With no annotations to rely on, the description only indicates a read operation without side effects. It lacks details on authentication requirements, error handling (e.g., what happens if the guest doesn't exist), or response structure.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the core functionality without redundancy or unnecessary details.

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?

Given no output schema, the description compensates by listing example configuration fields (cores, memory, disks, etc.). This helps the agent understand the richness of the return value, though the exact structure is not specified.

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 input schema provides a clear description for the 'guest' parameter (VMID or name). The tool description adds no additional semantic information about the parameter beyond the schema, but schema coverage is 100% so the baseline is adequate.

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 returns the full configuration of a VM or container, listing specific fields like cores, memory, disks, and network interfaces. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform actions like backup, clone, or delete.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the context of siblings implies it is for reading configuration, there is no direct guidance on when to choose this over other similar reading tools or prerequisites.

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