vm_reconfigure

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds details: it labels itself as [WRITE], explains hot-add requirements, and mentions audit logging. No annotation 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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by behavioral notes, prerequisites, and a clear parameter list. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (mutation, prerequisites, optional parameters), the description covers all necessary context: hot-add conditions, audit logging, parameter behavior, and return value. The output schema existence is noted, but the description still briefly describes the return.

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?

The description explains each parameter in plain language (e.g., 'omit to leave unchanged'), adding meaning beyond the input schema. It compensates for the 0% schema description coverage by fully detailing all four parameters.

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 explicitly states the tool changes a VM's vCPU count and/or memory, using a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like vm_create and vm_power_off by specifying CPU/memory reconfiguration.

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 when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, including prerequisites for hot-add and a pointer to vm_power_off if power-off is needed. It also explains the optional target parameter.

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