batch_clone_vms

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds operational details: 'full copy → optional reconfigure → optional snapshot → optional power on.' It discloses that the tool creates clones and applies optional modifications, which supplements the annotation information.

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?

Description is well-structured with a title line, a line summarizing steps, and an Args block. It is not overly verbose, though some elaboration could be trimmed. The format aids readability and quick comprehension.

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 complexity (batch full clones, 7 parameters, 0% schema coverage) and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description covers all parameters and the process flow. It does not explain error handling or batch behavior, but the output schema likely covers return values. The differentiation from siblings is clear.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It lists all 7 parameters with brief explanations (e.g., 'source_vm_name: Source VM to clone from.'). This provides necessary semantics for both required and optional parameters, making the tool usable despite the schema's lack of descriptions.

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?

Description starts with '[WRITE]' and clearly states 'Batch clone multiple VMs from a source VM (gold image).' It specifies that clones are full copies and lists steps, distinguishing it from sibling 'batch_linked_clone_vms' which creates linked clones.

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 implicitly indicates when to use this tool (for full clones, not linked clones) by mentioning 'full copy' in the steps. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like batch_linked_clone_vms or advise when not to use it. The context is clear enough for an agent.

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