get_vpn_user_login

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It lists error codes, which adds useful behavioral info about possible failures. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe the expected response structure beyond error codes.

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 very short with two sentences: one for the main purpose and one for error codes. It is efficient and directly to the point, but the error code list could be formatted better.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values. However, it does not mention that this is a retrieval operation or provide context on the scope of results. The error codes are helpful but not sufficient for completeness.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only says 'with the given login', adding no additional meaning, format, or constraints beyond what the schema already shows (required string).

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 it gets a VPN user by login. The verb 'Gets' and resource 'VPNUser' are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_vpn_user' or 'delete_vpn_user_login', but the login parameter in the name provides distinction.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only describes what it does without context on prerequisites or when it should be preferred over other VPN user operations.

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