list_vps

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: it list VPS, shows specific fields, and never returns passwords. This transparently sets user expectations.

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 concise sentences: purpose, shown data (with explicit exclusion), and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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 tool with no parameters, the description is complete enough. It covers what the tool does, what it returns, and when to call it. Could mention potential empty list but not critical.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description needs no additional parameter details. It appropriately avoids adding unnecessary semantics.

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 a specific verb ('Elenca') and resource ('VPS'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'connect_vps' or 'delete_vps'. It also states what fields are shown (nome, IP, username) and explicitly excludes passwords.

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 explicitly says 'Chiamare sempre questo tool per primo' (always call this tool first), providing clear guidance on when to use it. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternatives beyond implication.

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