hostodo_rename_vm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses the confirmation phrase and scope requirement, but does not mention potential side effects (e.g., whether a reboot is needed) or reversibility. For a rename operation, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 sentence plus a phrase, with no redundancy. Every word provides necessary information (purpose, scope, confirmation format).

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 rename tool without an output schema, the description covers the core aspects: what it does, required scope, and confirmation phrase. It could mention immediate effect or reboot, but overall it is sufficiently 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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for each parameter (vm_id, hostname, confirmation). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so 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 renames a Hostodo VPS hostname/display label. The verb 'rename' and resource 'Hostodo VPS' are specific, and no sibling tool performs a rename, so it distinguishes well from alternatives.

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 specifies the required scope ('vms:power') and the exact confirmation phrase needed, which provides clear usage guidance. While it does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, the lack of sibling rename tools makes this less critical.

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