list_vps_available_os

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: availability is specific to the VPS's node and narrower than the global OS catalog.

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 with all essential information front-loaded, followed by a clarifying contrast with list_os_images. No filler or repetition of schema details.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, relationship to reinstall_vps, and why the global catalog is not the same. Nothing an agent needs to choose and invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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%, and the only parameter is vps_id, which the description touches only as 'this specific VPS.' The parameter is self-descriptive from its name and type, but the description adds no detail on format, ownership, or how the ID should be obtained.

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 says exactly what the tool does: list the operating systems available to reinstall onto a specific VPS. It also differentiates from list_os_images by noting this is per-node availability rather than the full catalog, so an agent can tell them apart.

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 clearly anchors the tool to reinstall_vps and contrasts it with list_os_images' full catalog. The 'not every OS is available on every node' clause tells the agent when the per-VPS list is the right choice.

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