resume_guest

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

The description only states the action without disclosing any behavioral traits such as potential failure conditions, permission requirements, or side effects. With all annotations set to false, the description carries the full burden, and it fails to provide any context beyond the verb itself.

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 succinct sentence that is front-loaded and contains no fluff. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's function, making it an exemplar of conciseness.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate but omits important context. It does not clarify what 'resume' entails (e.g., that the guest must already be suspended) nor explain the 'vmid' parameter, leaving gaps in completeness despite the tool's simplicity.

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 has a single parameter 'vmid' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The tool description does not mention 'vmid' at all, leaving the agent to guess that it refers to the VM/container ID. Since coverage is low, the description should compensate, but it entirely omits parameter semantics.

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 ('Resume') and resource ('suspended VM or container'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like start_guest or shutdown_guest. The action is unambiguous and directly conveys the tool's purpose.

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 like start_guest or suspend_guest. It neither mentions prerequisites (e.g., guest must be suspended) nor excludes scenarios where other tools are more appropriate, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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