Get Attached Public Keys

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a safe read operation via 'Get', but it does not describe response format, error behavior, whether keys are returned as a list, or any rate limits. This is adequate for a simple read operation but lacks richness.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the key action and resource. Every word is necessary and the structure is immediately scannable.

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?

The tool is simple: one well-documented parameter, no output schema, and no annotations. For a straightforward read operation, the description sufficiently conveys the purpose and expected resource, though it omits details like return shape or edge cases. This is nearly complete for the tool's low 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single vm_id parameter, which is described as 'Virtual machine ID'. The description adds the context that keys are attached to a VPS, but this aligns with the parameter rather than enriching it. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('SSH public keys attached to a VPS'), clearly distinguishing this from siblings like vps_keys_list, which likely lists all keys, and vps_keys_attach, which attaches keys. The vm_id parameter reinforces the target VPS scope.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vps_keys_list or vps_keys_attach. The description does not mention scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name and siblings.

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