vm_apply_plan

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

The description states that on success the plan file is deleted, which is destructive behavior, yet annotations set destructiveHint=false, creating a contradiction. According to the scoring rules, this scores 1 due to annotation contradiction.

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 somewhat lengthy but front-loads the purpose and includes necessary details. It could be more concise but is well-structured.

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?

The description covers the execution flow, failure handling, and rollback suggestion. However, it lacks explicit details on the return value structure, which is not compensated by an output schema.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining plan_id as the ID from vm_create_plan and target as an optional vCenter/ESXi target.

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 starts with '[WRITE] Execute a previously created plan step by step,' clearly stating the verb 'Execute' and resource 'plan'. It distinguishes from siblings like vm_create_plan and vm_rollback_plan.

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 explains when to use this tool (execute a previously created plan) and what happens on failure, suggesting rollback. However, it does not explicitly exclude other tools like vm_list_plans.

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