get_vps_stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this returns a real-time snapshot and applies to running VPSs, but it does not disclose units, failure behavior, or what happens if the VPS is stopped. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

One tight, front-loaded sentence that states the resource, the timing, and the metric categories with zero filler. Every word contributes.

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 one-parameter read-only stats tool with annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete: it says what is returned and under what condition. The main omission is explicit units or output shape, but no output schema exists and the metric list already sets expectations.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description carries the burden, but it does not explicitly document vps_id. However, vps_id is a self-evident identifier and the description's 'running VPS' context helps clarify its referent. Minimal compensation, but enough for a single obvious parameter.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Real-time resource stats for a running VPS') and enumerates the exact metric categories: CPU, RAM, disk, and network. The qualifier 'right now' distinguishes this from historical siblings like get_vps_metrics_history and get_vps_bandwidth_history.

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 phrase 'for a running VPS' provides a clear context condition, and 'right now' signals that this is for current-state readings rather than history. It does not explicitly name alternatives/exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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