get_vpn_download_config_server_name_login

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It warns that each download invalidates previous config for that user, a key behavioral trait. It also lists error codes. However, it does not mention permissions or other side effects.

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: one sentence plus a warning and error codes. It is front-loaded with the main action. The inclusion of error codes may be slightly extraneous, but overall efficient.

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 that an output schema exists (though not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. It covers purpose, side effect, and errors. It could be more complete by mentioning typical file format or size, but it's sufficient.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only says 'for the given server and login', mapping the two parameters to server_name and login but providing no format or constraints. This is minimal added value.

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 states 'Download an OpenVPN configuration file for the given server and login', clearly specifying the action and resource. It is specific enough to distinguish from many sibling tools, though not explicitly differentiating.

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 includes a warning about invalidating previous configs for the same user, which is a usage constraint. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus other VPN-related tools, nor does it list prerequisites or alternatives.

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