change_vps_root_password

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false), so the description doesn't need to state that. It adds useful behavioral context (VPS must be stopped) and the confirm requirement, which goes beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose post-change behavior (e.g., whether the VPS needs a restart or how the change affects existing sessions), so transparency is limited.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action. The prerequisite and confirm requirement are stated efficiently with zero redundancy. Every word serves a purpose.

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 description references 'same reason as change_vps_hostname' without providing that reason, forcing the agent to look elsewhere for context. It also lacks information about what happens after the password change (e.g., whether a reboot is needed, how the password is applied). For a mutating tool with no output schema, these gaps make the description incomplete for safe invocation.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must compensate. It clarifies that new_password is the root/administrator password and explicitly states that confirm must be true. It does not provide password constraints (length, complexity) or explain the purpose of confirm beyond the requirement. Given the self-evident vps_id, this adds moderate value but is not comprehensive.

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 ('Change a VPS's root/administrator password') with a specific resource and target. It distinguishes itself from the sibling change_vps_hostname by referencing that tool, implying a different operation while sharing a prerequisite. The purpose is unambiguous.

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?

It states a key usage precondition: 'The VPS must already be stopped'. It also specifies that confirm=true is required, which is a direct invocation guideline. It does not explicitly outline when not to use the tool or alternative tools, but it gives enough context for correct usage in most cases.

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