post_vpn_client_config

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

With no annotations, the description must reveal behavioral traits. It lists error codes, hinting at possible failures (e.g., 'exist' for duplicates). However, it does not mention that only one active configuration is allowed (schema does), nor permissions or idempotency.

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 brief with one action sentence and a list of error codes. It is front-loaded but the long list could be summarized or grouped. No unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's complexity (10 parameters, 0 required, nested objects, output schema present), the description covers the basic creation action but lacks context about the creation process, such as whether an ID is generated or how the 'active' constraint is handled.

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 the input schema fully describes all 10 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter information; the error code list is not parameter-specific.

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 ('Creates a new VPNClientConfig') and identifies the resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'put_vpn_client_config_id' which updates an existing config.

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 is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like 'put_vpn_client_config_id' or what prerequisites are needed. The error code list is given but does not constitute usage guidelines.

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