VPS_installMonarxV1

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral transparency. It only says 'Install' but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether the VM restarts, if downtime is required, asynchronous behavior) or necessary permissions. The agent is left guessing about the operation's impact.

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 short (3 sentences) and front-loaded with the action. The background on Monarx is helpful but slightly verbose. No significant waste, but could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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 one-parameter tool, the description covers the core action. However, it lacks details on output or response (e.g., success/failure indication, job ID). With no output schema, the agent may need more information to interpret results. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 has 100% coverage with a description for 'virtualMachineId'. The description adds 'on a specified virtual machine' but no further semantic value like how to obtain the ID or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Install' and the resource 'Monarx malware scanner' on a specified virtual machine. It also provides background on what Monarx is, making the purpose unmistakable. Though it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings, the presence of VPS_uninstallMonarxV1 makes the contrast implicit.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other security tools, manual installation). There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or how to proceed after installation. The description only says 'Use this endpoint to enable malware protection' without context.

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