Manage OpenVPN Client

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

The description details behavioral nuances beyond annotations: idempotency by name, specific conflict responses (already_exists, CONFLICT, no_change), and password handling (always written because RouterOS doesn't return it). This adds significant context to the annotations.

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 concise (3 sentences) and front-loaded: first sentence states purpose, second explains idempotency/conflict, third covers password behavior. No wasted words.

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 tool with 12 parameters, no output schema, and important behavioral details, the description covers key aspects (idempotency, conflict, password). It could mention error responses or success indicators, but is reasonably 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that 'name' serves as idempotency key and explaining password behavior, which is not fully covered in schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Add, update, or remove an OpenVPN client interface.' It also differentiates from siblings like manage_ovpn_server by specifying it's for client interfaces.

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 implicitly guides usage via the action parameter (add/update/remove) and explains idempotency behavior, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like manage_ovpn_server.

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