Reset hostname

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds real context beyond them: the required permission scope (services:manage), the full-access API key requirement, the non-idempotency-keyed nature, and the no-op signal (noty=null). These are meaningful behavioral disclosures for a mutation route.

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 tight sentences that front-load the purpose before prerequisites and side effects. No filler, though it is slightly dense with qualifications.

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 destructive mutation with annotations covering the safety profile and a fully documented single parameter, the description supplies enough operational context (auth, idempotency, no-op return). No output schema is needed since return behavior is noted inline.

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 coverage is 100% with a single well-documented orderNo parameter (format, length, pattern). The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — 'Restore the immutable VPSnet-managed automatic hostname' — with the scope restricted to Container VPS, VPS, or Cloud VPS. This implicitly distinguishes it from change_hostname (which sets a custom hostname), though it does not name that sibling explicitly.

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?

Provides useful prerequisites ('Requires services:manage and a full-access API key'). However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to change_hostname or get_hostname, so the agent must infer which hostname tool to pick.

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