pve_vm_config

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

The annotation already declares readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds value by detailing that the tool returns the complete config object with specific fields (cores, memory, disk entries, etc.) and that the node is auto-resolved. It does not disclose any side effects beyond reading, which is consistent with the annotation.

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 concise, using one paragraph with a clear structure: main purpose, then details on location, return content, and source. Every sentence adds information without redundancy, though the source URL could be omitted as it's an implementation detail.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown) and simple input parameters, the description covers the essential aspects: what the tool does, how it identifies the VM, and what it returns. It omits error scenarios and prerequisites, but for a read-only config retrieval, this is sufficient.

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 no descriptions for the two parameters, but the description explains both: vmid is the identifier, and node is optional and auto-resolved. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type/title information. While not exhaustive, it adequately covers the parameters.

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 one VM or container, identifying the resource by vmid. The verb 'Full configuration' and the mention of returned fields specify the purpose. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like pve_vm_set_config (write) or pve_vm_status, leaving room for ambiguity.

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 such as pve_vm_set_config for modification or pve_vm_status for status. There is no mention of prerequisites or context where this tool is preferred, leaving the agent to infer usage from the readOnlyHint annotation.

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