Mọi dịch vụ đang chạy

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered externally. The description adds nothing beyond that — no indication of what the aggregate contains per item, whether it paginates, or how virtual accounts and webhooks are folded into the same payload.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the resource scope is front-loaded. It is not padded, though it is arguably too terse to carry its weight.

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 zero-parameter aggregate read with rich annotations but no output schema, the description at least enumerates the resource families it spans. It is still thin on what a combined VPS/database/virtual-account/webhook payload actually looks like, leaving the agent to discover the shape at call time.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter syntax the description could usefully add.

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 states a verb ('Gom' = aggregates) and names the resources involved: MONA Cloud VPS/databases plus virtual accounts and webhooks. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the near-identically-named sibling cloud_services_list (or vibecloud_list_services), so an agent cannot tell without guessing whether this is an overview vs. a plain list endpoint.

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 when-to-use statement, no prerequisite, and no mention of the alternatives (cloud_services_list, cloud_vps_create, cloud_db_create). The agent must infer usage purely from the name.

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