get_vps_console

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

Annotations already declare the operation as read-only and idempotent. The description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying that the credentials are one-time and sensitive, which is beyond what annotations convey. This helps the agent treat the output cautiously without contradicting the read-only hint.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and key return values without wasted words. It is concise and clearly structured, making it easy for an agent to parse.

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 the tool's low complexity (one parameter) and the lack of an output schema, the description provides essential context: it specifies the output (URL and password) and notes the sensitive nature. It does not detail the response format, but that is likely unnecessary for successful invocation. Overall, the description gives enough information to call 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. It does not explicitly explain vps_id, leaving the parameter meaning to inference from the tool name. The description only indirectly references the VPS via 'this VPS', which is insufficient to clarify the parameter's format or purpose.

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 retrieves a one-time VNC console URL and password for a VPS, which is a specific verb-resource pairing. It distinguishes itself from other VPS getter tools (e.g., get_vps, get_vps_stats) by focusing on console access, leaving no ambiguity about its function.

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 usage (to obtain live console access) but does not explicitly state when to choose this over other tools or list any exclusions. There is no direct sibling alternative for console access, so the lack of explicit 'use this instead of X' is acceptable, but it still does not provide any contextual conditions for use.

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