start_vps

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

The annotations are all false, so they add no positive behavioral detail. The description only says 'Start a stopped VPS' and does not disclose whether the operation is asynchronous, what happens if the VPS is already running, whether billing is affected, or what state change is expected beyond the verb itself.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. For a tool this simple, it is appropriately sized and every word contributes to meaning.

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 single-parameter mutating tool with no output schema and no positive annotations, the description is nearly sufficient but leaves gaps such as expected response/status, idempotency, and behavior on an already-running VPS. It is minimally viable but not fully complete.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage and the description does not mention vps_id at all. While the parameter name is fairly self-explanatory, the description adds no guidance about the expected format, how to obtain the ID, or how it maps to the action.

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 'start' and resource 'VPS' with an explicit precondition 'stopped'. This clearly differentiates it from sibling operations like stop_vps, restart_vps, and create_vps, so an agent can select it without needing to inspect other schemas.

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 'stopped VPS' gives a clear invocation context: use this when a VPS is stopped and the goal is to bring it into a running state. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the conditional wording and sibling tool names make the intended use reasonably clear.

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