users_create

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the primary action (creation) without revealing side effects, required permissions, error conditions (e.g., duplicate username), or the response format. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, clear sentence that states the purpose without any fluff. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple creation tool.

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 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the one-line description is insufficient. It doesn't explain expected return values, uniqueness requirements, or any operational caveats. An agent would need more context to call this tool correctly and interpret the result.

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?

All 12 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the schema already explains each parameter. The tool description adds no extra meaning or clarification beyond what's in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Create a new VPN user in Remnawave'. It specifies the verb (create), the resource (VPN user), and the system context (Remnawave). This is distinct from sibling tools like users_update or users_delete, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as bulk creation or other user operations. It doesn't mention prerequisites, uniqueness constraints, or situations where a different tool would be preferred. There is no 'when to use' context.

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