put_vpn_openvpn_routed_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral aspects. It only lists cryptic error codes without explanation (e.g., 'inval', 'exist'). It does not disclose whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on success, necessary permissions, or side effects. The error list is unhelpful without context.

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 short (two sentences), but the first sentence is vague and the second is a list of error codes. Important information about purpose or usage is not front-loaded. While it is concise, it lacks structure and prioritization of key details.

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 has 17 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema provided (though context says it exists), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the overall function, required context (e.g., which server to update, how to specify id), or any relationship to other VPN configs. The lack of annotations exacerbates the incompleteness.

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 covers all 17 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). However, the description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides. According to guidelines, with high coverage, baseline is 3, and no extra context is given, so score remains 3.

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 'Update the VPNServerConfig', which indicates a mutation, but it is vague about which specific VPN server config. The tool name includes 'openvpn_routed_config', but the description does not mention OpenVPN or routing. It fails to distinguish from siblings like 'put_vpn_client_config_id' or 'put_vpn_user_login' that also update VPN configurations. A specific verb and resource are present, but the scope is unclear.

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 versus other VPN-related PUT tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios, or alternatives. The description does not help an AI agent decide between this and similar sibling tools.

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