Изменение VPC

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

Annotations already indicate this is not a read-only or destructive operation. The description adds that only name and description are affected, but does not disclose any further behavioral consequences. Given the annotation coverage, the description provides adequate but not rich behavioral context.

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, direct sentence that immediately conveys the action and target. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 update operation with complete parameter schema and annotations, the description is sufficient. It states the purpose and the modifiable fields, and the schema handles parameter details. There is no output schema, so return value documentation is not expected.

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 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the schema already documents each field. The description mentions name and description but adds no syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies.

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 the name and/or description of a VPC by its ID. This is a specific action on a defined resource, distinguishing it from creation, deletion, or query operations. The Russian text explicitly mentions the resource (VPC) and the action (change).

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 implies the tool's purpose but does not explicitly state when to use it relative to alternatives. It names the exact fields that can be modified, which provides context, but lacks guidance on when not to use it (e.g., for deleting or creating VPCs). Since the function name and description are self-explanatory, a 4 is appropriate.

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