get_vps_metrics

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals safety. The description adds that the data is time-series and identifies the metric categories, which gives some expectation of the output shape. However, it doesn't disclose default range behavior or any response structure details beyond that.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose. Every word contributes to clarity, with no unnecessary repetition or 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 read-only metrics tool with 2 well-documented parameters, the description covers the essential purpose and metric scope. Without an output schema, a bit more detail on default range or response format would be helpful, but it's not critically missing.

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 the description adds no additional parameter guidance. It doesn't mention the range parameter or service_id, but the schema already documents them adequately.

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 that the tool returns time-series resource metrics (CPU, memory, network, disk) for a VPS. This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_vps_status (current status) and list_vps (list VPSs).

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 implies usage by naming the resource and metric types, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention exclusions. An agent can infer that this is for historical resource monitoring, but no explicit guidance is provided.

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