Manage PPP Profile

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

Beyond annotations (idempotentHint, readOnlyHint, etc.), the description adds specific behaviors: idempotent by name, update returns no_change, and built-in profiles blocking removal. This provides valuable context beyond the schema.

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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with key purpose, then specifics. Each sentence earns its place.

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 10 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key behaviors (idempotency, update result, built-in profile restriction). Minor gaps: default router behavior and error handling beyond the noted case.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, but the description adds the concept of 'idempotency key' for the name parameter and explains the effect of update (no_change). This adds meaning beyond the bare 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 action (Add, update, or remove) and the resource (PPP profile). It also notes idempotency by name and special behavior for built-in profiles, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like `list_ppp_profiles`.

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 by listing actions and noting that built-in profiles cannot be removed, providing a when-not-to-use scenario. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or specify prerequisites.

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