Добавление VCS провайдера

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), and the description's 'adds' is consistent. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as whether a connectivity check is performed, side effects, or reversibility. The error-handling instructions are in the schema parameter descriptions, not the tool description.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the purpose. No filler, redundant details, or unnecessary length.

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?

Given the rich schema descriptions and annotations, the short description is largely sufficient. The main gap is the lack of an output schema or explicit mention of return values, but the purpose and required inputs are clear, and the schema covers authentication and error handling.

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 schema provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all four parameters, including format, example, enum, requirements for private repositories, and error recovery steps. The tool description itself does not add any parameter information, so the 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 a specific verb 'adds' with a clear resource 'VCS provider' and states the purpose 'for connecting Git repositories to Timeweb Cloud'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_vcs_providers that list providers.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools; the only usage context is implied by the verb 'adds'.

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