get_vps

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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only and idempotent, so safety is covered. The description adds that the response contains 'full detail' and clarifies the id format, but it does not disclose error behavior or response structure. This is acceptable given the annotations, but no additional behavioral context is provided.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the operation and resource, then supplies the essential parameter guidance. No filler, no redundancy, and every word earns its place.

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 simple read-only get-by-id tool with one parameter and strong annotations, this description is complete. It identifies the input, its source, and the output nature ('full detail'). No critical information is missing for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must fully explain the parameter. It does: vps_id is a UUID and comes from list_vps's id field. This goes well beyond the schema's bare string type and gives the agent everything needed to supply a valid value.

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 identifies the operation (get full detail), the resource (one VPS instance), and the key discriminator (by id, as opposed to listing). It also points the agent to list_vps for obtaining that id, making the tool's role unambiguous among many VPS-related siblings.

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 description implies when to use this tool: when you need full detail for a specific VPS and already know its id. It also tells the agent where the id comes from (list_vps's id field). It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear.

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