Registers a new hardware ID (HWID) device for a user, linking platform, OS, and model details to enable device-specific access and management in a Remnawave VPN panel.
Create a HWID device entry for a user
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hwid | Yes | Hardware ID | |
| userId | Yes | User numeric ID | |
| platform | No | Device platform | |
| osVersion | No | OS version | |
| userAgent | No | User agent | |
| deviceModel | No | Device model |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool creates an entry, with no mention of side effects, permissions, idempotency, uniqueness behavior, or whether the user must already exist.
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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing.
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?
The tool is a mutation with no annotations and no output schema, yet the description does not mention expected return value, failure modes, or any behavioral caveats. The schema covers parameters, but contextual information needed for safe invocation is missing.
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 100%, so the baseline applies. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.
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 names a specific action (Create), a specific resource (HWID device entry), and the target (a user). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like hwid_device_delete and hwid_devices_list_all.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions. It implies the obvious 'use to create a HWID entry' but provides no decision-making context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.