Get Post-Install Script

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state that the operation is read-only, what the response contains, how errors are handled, or any other behavioral details. The term 'Get' implies read-only, but no specifics are disclosed.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no fluff or extraneous information.

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns (e.g., script content, metadata), but it does not. This is a fairly simple tool, yet the lack of return-value information leaves significant uncertainty for the agent.

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 schema has a single parameter (script_id) with a description 'Script ID' and 100% coverage. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the concrete verb 'Get' with the specific resource 'post-install script' and qualifies it with 'specific', clearly signaling retrieval of one item by ID. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vps_scripts_list which lists all scripts.

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 usage context is implied: you use this tool when you need a particular post-install script, likely after listing scripts to find an ID. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use it versus alternatives or any exclusions, so it does not fully guide the agent.

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