timeweb_list_vpc_services

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. 'List' clearly indicates a read operation, and the scope is specified. However, it does not disclose any potential pagination, rate limits, or other behavioral nuances that could affect an agent's expectations.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and resource immediately.

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 list operation with complete schema documentation, the description adequately captures the core purpose. The examples of service types add useful context, though it could mention output format or pagination. Overall, it is complete enough for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100% for both parameters (vpc_id and format) with descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List') and clearly identifies the resource ('services (servers, databases, etc.) attached to a VPC'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like timeweb_list_vpcs and timeweb_get_vpc which operate on VPCs themselves.

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 implies usage (when you need to list services in a VPC) but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives or any exclusions. It is not misleading, but relies on the agent to infer context.

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