VMware-AIops

vm_clone

Clone a virtual machine or template to a new name, optionally specifying target host and datastore. Power on the clone after creation if needed.

Instructions

[WRITE] Clone a VM. Without to_host/to_datastore the clone lands on the source's host+datastore.

Args: vm_name: Source VM (or template) name. new_name: Name for the new clone. to_host: Target ESXi host name (default: source's host). to_datastore: Target datastore name (default: source's datastore). power_on: Power on the clone after creation. target: vCenter/ESXi target name from config.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "vm_name": "<vm_name>",
      "new_name": "<new_name>"
    },
    "name": "vm_clone"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`target`	No
`to_host`	No
`vm_name`	Yes
`new_name`	Yes
`power_on`	No
`to_datastore`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.5.29May 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate non-readOnly (write), non-destructive, non-idempotent. The description adds value by specifying the default placement behavior, the power_on option, and the target parameter for connection. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful context beyond structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise: a brief summary line followed by a structured parameter list. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the core action and efficiently uses markdown-like formatting.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 6 parameters (2 required) and an output schema, the description covers all parameters, defaults, and basic behavior. It could mention potential side effects (e.g., cloning time) but is sufficiently complete given the annotations and output schema presence.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by listing each parameter with clear explanations (e.g., 'vm_name: Source VM (or template) name'). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema types and defaults.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Clone a VM' with a [WRITE] prefix, specifying the core action. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like batch_clone_vms and deploy_linked_clone by detailing the full clone behavior and optional placement parameters, making the purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains when to omit to_host/to_datastore ('lands on source's host+datastore'), providing some guidance. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like batch_clone_vms or deploy_linked_clone, leaving the agent to infer when to use this tool over them.

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