VPS_getMetricsV1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It implies a read operation ('Retrieve historical metrics') but does not explicitly state whether it is safe, idempotent, or has any side effects. No mention of authorization requirements or rate limits.

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 two short paragraphs, front-loading the purpose and then listing metrics. It is efficient but could be trimmed further; the second sentence of the first paragraph is redundant with the list. Still, it is concise overall.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not describe the response format (e.g., time series, units, granularity). For a metrics retrieval tool, this is a significant gap. The description also fails to explain data range or time zone expectations for the date parameters.

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 covers all three parameters with basic descriptions. The tool description does not add significant meaning beyond listing the metrics returned, which is indirectly helpful but does not clarify parameter formats (e.g., date format) or constraints. With 100% schema coverage, 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 tool retrieves historical metrics for a specified VM and lists the specific metrics (CPU, memory, disk, network, uptime). This verb+resource combination is specific and distinct from sibling tools like VPS_getScanMetricsV1.

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 includes 'Use this endpoint to monitor VPS performance and resource utilization over time,' which provides a clear usage context. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives among siblings.

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