create_vps_backup

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

Beyond annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral facts: the action may incur a cost and requires confirm=true. It does not discuss whether the backup is created asynchronously or what the full side effects are, but the cost and confirmation guard are valuable additions.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the two most important conditions: cost check and confirmation. No filler or repetition.

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 two-parameter creation tool, the description covers the core call conditions: target VPS, confirmation flag, and cost risk. It does not describe the response or return value, but no output schema exists and an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage, the description has to compensate. It explains confirm ('Requires confirm=true') and implies vps_id via 'this VPS', but it does not describe the expected value, format, or source of vps_id. This is partial compensation rather than full documentation.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Take') and resource ('a new backup of this VPS'), making the creation intent clear. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling backup operations like list_vps_backups or restore_vps_backup, but 'new backup' is enough to distinguish the action.

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 gives actionable guidance to check get_vps_backup_cost first because the operation may incur cost, and it states the confirmation requirement. It does not explicitly list when not to use the tool or name alternatives, but the cost-check sequence is clear usage context.

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