guest_config

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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only and non-destructive; the description reinforces this with 'Get' and adds scope detail ('every other config key'), which is useful context about the return value. No contradiction with 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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the operation and resource, then expands with examples. No wasted words.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it gets, its scope, and what is included. No additional behavior or return format explanation is necessary.

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 has only one required integer (vmid) with 0% schema description coverage. The description indirectly clarifies that the parameter refers to a specific VM or container, which is enough for this obvious single parameter. It does not explicitly name vmid but the context makes it clear.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full configuration of a VM or container'), enumerates example keys (disks, network, memory, CPU, boot order), and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like guest_status and set_guest_config.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving complete configuration details, which is distinct from siblings like list_guests (summary) or guest_status (state). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear for a simple getter.

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