vyos_load_config

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds context that the entire running config is replaced, which goes beyond annotations. However, it does not detail other behaviors like commit behavior or rollback information.

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 efficiently structured: a main sentence, warning, args line, and returns line. Every sentence adds value, and the warning is front-loaded for immediate attention.

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 tool with one parameter and a clear output schema, the description covers the core behavior and warning. It could mention error handling or post-load state, but the output schema (success/error) and annotations provide sufficient context.

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 already provides a description for the 'file' parameter with an example path. The tool description repeats this info ('absolute path on VyOS filesystem') without adding new meaning. Schema coverage is effective, so 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?

Clearly states 'Load a configuration file, replacing the running configuration.' This specifies the action (load) and resource (configuration file) and distinguishes from sibling vyos_merge_config by indicating replacement versus merging.

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 warning 'replaces the entire running config' implicitly advises against use when partial changes are desired, but no explicit comparison to alternatives (e.g., vyos_merge_config) or context for when to choose this tool is provided.

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