vm_guest_exec

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), the description details return values (exit_code, stdout, stderr, timed_out) and warns about API limitations with a redirect workaround. No contradictions.

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 concise (~10 lines), front-loads the core action and requirement, then covers output, caveat, workaround, and parameter details. Every sentence adds value.

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 (7 parameters, 2 required, no output schema), the description covers prerequisites, return fields, and alternative approaches, making it complete for correct agent invocation.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains all 7 parameters with examples (e.g., command and arguments), defaults (username, password), and optionality (working_directory, target). This compensates entirely.

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 begins with '[WRITE] Execute a command inside a VM via VMware Tools,' clearly stating the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vm_guest_download and vm_guest_exec_output, 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.

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

The description specifies the prerequisite ('Requires VMware Tools running in the guest OS') and provides a workflow for capturing output using vm_guest_download. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use, the context is clear and helpful.

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