Список ОС для VPS

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

The description describes a read-only list operation ('Возвращает список'), but annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, which suggests potential side effects. This contradicts the description's clear read-only nature. Beyond the contradiction, the description provides no additional behavioral details such as authentication or rate limits.

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 two short sentences, with the main action first and usage guidance second. Every word earns its place; no fluff.

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 parameterless list tool, the description adequately covers what the tool returns and when to use it. It could mention response format or whether the list is exhaustive, but the complexity is low, so 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there is no parameter burden to carry. The description adds value by listing the returned fields (ID, family, name, etc.), which helps the agent know what to expect, though not needed for parameters.

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 returns a list of operating systems available for VPS installation, listing specific fields (ID, family, name, version, codename, minimum requirements). The verb 'Возвращает' plus resource 'список операционных систем' is specific and distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_server_presets or list_server_software.

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 explicitly instructs to use this tool before creating a VPS to choose os_id, providing clear usage context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or compare with alternative list tools, so it's slightly below top mark.

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