Execute VPS Command

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

Annotations indicate mutability and side effects (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds context about instance targeting (prod vs dev) and notes that the 'reveal' parameter is audited. It does not explicitly warn about potential destructive actions, but given the tool executes arbitrary commands, the inherent risk is implied.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the action, the second clarifies defaults, and the third lists use cases. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 no output schema, the description specifies the return format (stdout, stderr, exit code). It covers targets, default instance, and common use cases. This is complete for a general-purpose command execution tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds marginal value by reiterating instance routing ('pass instance='dev' to run inside the OrbStack ubuntu machine'), which is already detailed in the schema. No additional meaning is added for other 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 clearly states the verb 'Run a shell command' on the 'selected VPS' and specifies it returns stdout, stderr, and exit code. It distinguishes from siblings by being a generic command executor, contrasting with dedicated tools like vps_docker_logs or vps_read_file.

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 says 'Use for any ad-hoc operation' and lists examples, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives for specific tasks (e.g., Docker logs vs vps_docker_logs). This leaves the agent without clear exclusions.

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