order_vps

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that payment is drawn from prepaid balance, a useful behavioral trait, but does not mention failure modes (e.g., insufficient balance), whether the order is synchronous, or any provisioning delays. This is a mutation tool, so more transparency is needed.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no fluff. Every word earns its place while still conveying the payment mechanism.

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 and no annotations, the description is thin on side effects and error handling. It covers the core action and payment source, and the input schema is well-documented, but it does not explain what happens on success, failure, or how long provisioning takes. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for each parameter. The description adds the phrase 'by plan slug + OS id', which reinforces the relationship but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action 'Order' and the resource 'VPS', with the key inputs 'plan slug' and 'OS id'. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_vps and cancel_service, leaving no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 for creating a new VPS with a prepaid balance, but it does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives or mention prerequisites like checking balance first. The unique purpose makes alternatives obvious, but guidance is minimal.

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