get_vps_bandwidth_history

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the 'historical' context, indicating this returns past data rather than real-time or current stats. However, it does not disclose response format, time granularity, or error behavior, which would add value beyond annotations.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Historical bandwidth usage'). It is efficient with no fluff, though it could be slightly more informative without losing brevity.

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 indicate what the agent can expect from the response (e.g., total bandwidth, time series, units). It does not, and it also lacks details on optional parameters (like time range) or how to interpret the data. For a read-only tool, the description is incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented vps_id parameter. It only says 'for one VPS', which is already implied by the parameter name. No format, required context, or relationship to the data is explained, adding minimal value over the schema.

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 tool fetches historical bandwidth usage for a single VPS. It specifies a resource (VPS) and the nature of the data (historical bandwidth). It distinguishes itself from broader overview tools like get_bandwidth_overview, but doesn't explicitly name alternatives, so it's not fully self-differentiating.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs similar ones like get_vps_stats or get_vps_metrics_history. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name and sibling list.

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