Изменение метаданных сервера

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write nature is clear. The description adds the specific list of updatable fields and the resize alternative, but does not disclose behavioral nuances like partial update semantics or effect of cloud_init changes.

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 sentences, front-loading the core purpose and then providing an explicit alternative. No filler or redundant content.

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 metadata update tool with 5 parameters and full schema coverage, the description covers the purpose and key alternative. It does not mention return values or prerequisites, but these are less critical given the simplicity and no output schema.

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 each parameter having a Russian description. The tool description only lists the field names in prose, adding no additional semantic detail beyond what the JSON Schema already provides.

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 updates server metadata (name, comment, avatar_id, cloud_init), using the specific verb 'обновляет' and resource 'сервера'. It also distinguishes itself from resize_server, making its purpose 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?

The description explicitly directs users to use resize_server for resizing (preset/configurator), providing a clear alternative. It implies this tool is for metadata updates only.

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