VPS_startProjectV1

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

The description states that containers are started in dependency order and that only stopped services are affected. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It lacks details on idempotency, error behavior, or prerequisites like project existence.

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 three concise sentences with no superfluous text. The key action and use cases are front-loaded, making it efficient for an AI agent.

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 start operation, the description covers the main functional behavior and use cases. Without an output schema, it could mention return format or that the operation is non-destructive, but it is largely complete.

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 100%, with both parameters already well-described. The description does not add any additional meaning or context for the parameters, so a baseline score of 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 uses specific verbs ('starts all services') and identifies the resource ('Docker Compose project'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like VPS_stopProjectV1 and VPS_restartProjectV1 by focusing on starting stopped services.

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 mentions two use cases: resuming a stopped project and starting after reboot. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., VPS_restartProjectV1) or explain when not to use this tool. The guidance is present but minimal.

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