add_ppp_secret

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions a configuration requirement but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is reversible, what side effects occur, or authentication needs beyond the environment variable.

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 and front-loaded with the purpose in Indonesian, followed by the requirement and argument list. Every sentence is necessary, though the mix of languages (Indonesian and English) slightly reduces clarity for non-Indonesian agents.

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?

For a simple creation tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers all inputs and prerequisites. However, it lacks details on what the tool returns, error handling, or confirmation of success, making it adequate but not comprehensive.

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 0%, but the description explains each parameter: name (username), password, service (with example values), and profile (with default). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema, though it could include constraints like password format or service enum.

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 tool adds a PPP account (PPPoE/VPN) and lists its arguments. It is specific about the resource but does not differentiate from sibling tools like add_hotspot_user or add_static_dhcp_lease, which have similar 'add' verbs.

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 a prerequisite (MIKROCLAW_ALLOW_WRITE=true) but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when not to use it. The usage context is only implied.

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