Создание виртуальной приватной сети (VPC)

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond restating the purpose; it doesn't disclose side effects, permission requirements, or state changes. With annotations present, more context would be needed to earn a higher score.

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 with no filler. Key information (creates a VPC) is front-loaded, and every word earns its place. This is an appropriately sized description.

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 create operation, the description combined with the complete schema and annotations provides sufficient invocation details. However, there is no output schema and the description does not mention the response format or any post-creation behavior, which is a minor gap. Overall it is adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 provides full coverage (100%) of all three parameters with descriptions, including a regex pattern for subnet_v4 and an enum for availability_zone. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, 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 ('Создает' = Creates) with a clear resource ('новую виртуальную приватную сеть' = new VPC) and specifies the key scope (availability zone). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_vpc, update_vpc, and delete_vpc, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The description only states what the tool does, not when to choose it over related tools or any prerequisites. While the name and sibling list imply it is the creation counterpart, there is no explicit guidance.

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