Kill Guest Process

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does clearly state the destructive action: killing a process inside the guest VM. However, it omits other useful behavioral context such as irreversibility, whether VMware Tools are required, or what happens when the PID is invalid.

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 a single, focused sentence with no filler. The key action, target, and required identifier are all front-loaded and immediately usable.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema or nested objects, the description plus the input schema cover the core call correctly. It is slightly incomplete in that it does not mention the guest-side requirements or the effect of a failed kill, but the essential context for invoking the tool is present.

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 schema already documents both parameters with full coverage, including the pid description referencing guest_process_list. The tool description adds little beyond restating that the operation uses a PID, so it does not meaningfully enhance what the schema already provides.

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 uses the specific verb 'Kill' and identifies the exact resource: a process inside the guest VM, selected by PID. It is not a tautology of the title and clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like guest_process_list or guest_run_command.

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 phrase 'by its PID' implies the caller must already know which process to target, and the schema's pid description even points to guest_process_list. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like guest tools or listing the process first.

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