apply_vm_tag

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses that the operation is additive ('existing tags survive'), describes the return format (and what it does NOT return), and notes the side effect of tag-based group membership shifts. This adds valuable behavioral context beyond the structured 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?

The description is compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the core action, followed by return value, usage guidance, and side effects. Every sentence contributes useful information without fluff.

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?

This tool has 4 parameters (3 required), no output schema, and no enum constraints. The description covers purpose, parameter semantics, return format, workflow (using list_vm_tags and get_group), and side effects. It provides a complete picture for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: vm_id ('VM external ID (fabric UUID, from list_vm_tags)'), tag_scope (with examples), tag_value (with examples), and target ('Optional NSX Manager target from config'). This adds meaning far beyond the bare schema.

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 the tool's function: 'Apply an NSX tag to a virtual machine.' It uses a specific verb ('Apply') and resource ('NSX tag to a virtual machine'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_vm_tags and remove_vm_tag by focusing on the action of applying a tag.

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 explicit usage context: 'Use list_vm_tags first for the vm_id, and again after to see the result.' It also advises checking with get_group for side effects. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives, the workflow guidance is clear and actionable.

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