Install Monarx

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

Annotations already identify this as a mutating, non-destructive call (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), and the description agrees. It adds the useful context that Monarx is a malware scanner and the endpoint enables protection, but it does not mention installation side effects, prerequisites, or duration. That is acceptable but not rich.

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 essential first sentence is strong, but the rest is redundant: the second and third sentences repeatedly explain that Monarx is a security tool, and the last sentence restates the first. The description would be improved by keeping one sentence about the endpoint and one about the target.

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 mutating endpoint with no output schema and non-destructive annotations, the description provides enough for an agent to call it: the target is the virtual machine ID and the action is installing malware protection. It lacks detail on return behavior or side effects, but those are not required for such a simple operation.

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 covers the only parameter, virtualMachineId, with 'Virtual Machine ID'; schema description coverage is 100%. The description refers to 'a specified virtual machine' and 'VPS instances,' which loosely connects the parameter to its meaning but adds little beyond the schema. Baseline 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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Install the Monarx malware scanner on a specified virtual machine.' It also states the practical outcome, 'enable malware protection on VPS instances,' and the contrast with the sibling VPS_uninstallMonarxV1 is implicit in the verb 'install.'

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 final sentence, 'Use this endpoint to enable malware protection on VPS instances,' gives explicit context for when to call the tool. It does not name alternatives such as VPS_uninstallMonarxV1 or state when not to use it, so it stops just short of full guidance.

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