VMware-AIops

vm_power_on

Idempotent

Power on a named virtual machine. Optionally target a specific vCenter or ESXi host.

Instructions

[WRITE] Power on a virtual machine.

Args: vm_name: Exact name of the virtual machine. target: Optional vCenter/ESXi target name from config. Uses default if omitted.

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>"
    },
    "name": "vm_power_on"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`target`	No
`vm_name`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.5.29May 29, 2026
Removedv1.5.28May 22, 2026
First observedv0.6.0Mar 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false, idempotentHint true, openWorldHint true. The description adds a [WRITE] tag and explains target parameter behavior, which aligns with annotations. It does not detail idempotent behavior or state requirements, but adds value beyond annotations.

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 very concise with a clear [WRITE] prefix and structured parameter explanations. No unnecessary text.

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?

The description covers essential aspects for a simple power-on tool with output schema present. It could mention prerequisites like VM must exist or behavior if already powered on, but overall is adequate.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly explains both parameters: 'Exact name' for vm_name and optional target with default behavior.

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 explicitly says 'Power on a virtual machine', which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like vm_power_off.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context on the tool's purpose (power on a VM) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The [WRITE] prefix adds clarity.

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