Get VPS Details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of indicating side effects. 'Get details' clearly implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that no changes are made or provide any additional behavioral context such as error handling or rate limits. It is minimally sufficient for a simple read.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It efficiently communicates the tool's essence.

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 single-parameter read tool, the description is adequate for selecting it. However, with no output schema, it does not specify what 'details' are returned (e.g., IP, status, specs) or how missing/nonexistent VM IDs are handled. This leaves some ambiguity, but the low complexity keeps it from being severely incomplete.

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 the single parameter (vm_id, 'Virtual machine ID'), so the description does not need to compensate. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, aligning with the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Get') and the target resource ('details of a specific virtual machine'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like vps_list, which lists all VMs, and vps_docker_get, which targets Docker containers.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that vps_list should be used for enumerating VMs or that this tool returns full details for a single VM, nor does it note any prerequisites or exclusions.

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