list_vps

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, so the description only needs to add value beyond that. It adds scope (account's VPS services) and output fields, but does not mention pagination, potential delays, or any other behavioral nuance. This is acceptable but minimal.

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 one concise, front-loaded sentence that states the action and the output, with no filler or redundant information.

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 list operation with no input parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what is listed and what fields are returned. No additional context is needed.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description's mention of 'the account's' clarifies the implicit scope but does not need to document parameter details. It adds enough context given the lack of 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 a specific action (list), a specific resource (the account's VPS services), and the scope (account-level). It also lists the returned fields (id, status, plan), making it distinct from sibling tools like get_vps_status or power_vps.

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 makes the tool's purpose unmistakable: to list all VPS services. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, but the context is clear given the sibling tools. A slightly higher score would require an explicit alternative statement.

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