Gói cấu hình MONA Cloud

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the core behavior — listing package slugs with CPU/RAM/disk specs — which implies a read-only query. However, it doesn't clarify whether the list shows all available packages or only the user's, nor whether authentication is required.

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 short Vietnamese sentence with a front-loaded verb and no filler. Every word contributes either the resource or the returned fields, and the length is appropriate for a parameterless list operation.

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 simple zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential need by naming the returned fields. It is slightly incomplete only because it doesn't situate itself among the cloud/vibecloud sibling family or clarify the scope of the listing.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so the baseline of 4 applies — there is nothing the description needs to document about parameters. Its focus on output fields is the appropriate use of the description.

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 names a specific verb (liệt kê/list), a resource (MONA Cloud packages), and the exact output fields (package_slug, CPU/RAM/disk), so an agent knows what the tool does and returns. The title reinforces the platform. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from vibecloud_packages or cloud_plan_list, but the 'cloud_' prefix and title provide partial differentiation.

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?

No guidance is given about when to call this tool versus the many overlapping siblings (vibecloud_packages, cloud_plan_list, cloud_prices, cloud_services_list). There are no exclusions, conditions, or alternative references, so an agent must guess which listing tool satisfies its intent.

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