linode_get_vpc

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds behavioral context by specifying that the tool returns subnets and instances, which is beyond what the name implies. No contradictions with annotations.

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 15-word sentence that conveys the tool's purpose efficiently. Every word is necessary and front-loaded.

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 get-by-id tool with one parameter and an output schema (not provided but referenced), the description covers the essential behavioral aspects. It is complete enough for an agent to understand when to use it.

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 0%, but the description mentions 'by id' which adds minimal context to the single integer parameter vpc_id. The parameter name is self-explanatory, so the description provides only slight additional meaning.

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 'Get', the resource 'one VPC by id', and includes what is returned ('its subnets and the instances in each subnet'). This distinguishes it from siblings like linode_list_vpcs which lists all VPCs without detailed subnets/instances.

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 when a specific VPC ID is known and detailed information including subnets and instances is needed. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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