timeweb_get_vpc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation but provides no details about the exact fields returned, error handling, pagination, or permission requirements. The terse phrasing 'detailed information' is vague about what constitutes 'detailed'.

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, clear sentence that states the tool's function without any extraneous information. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 simple nature of a get operation and the well-documented schema, the description is adequate but sparse. It does not explain what 'detailed information' includes, nor does it clarify the effect of the 'format' parameter beyond the schema. There is no output schema, so the agent is left wondering about the response structure.

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 100%—both 'format' and 'vpc_id' are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the verb 'Get' with the resource 'specific VPC', making it clear this is a retrieval operation for a single VPC. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like timeweb_list_vpcs (which lists all VPCs) and timeweb_delete_vpc.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as using timeweb_list_vpcs for browsing multiple VPCs. However, the phrase 'specific VPC' implies its use case, so the guidance remains implicit.

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