vyos_merge_config

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds transparency by explaining that merging does not remove unrelated configuration and supports commit-confirm for safe rollback, which is useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 well-structured with paragraphs, bullet-pointed args, and examples. It is concise without being overly terse, though the example section could be slightly trimmed.

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 description covers purpose, parameters, return type, and examples. With an output schema present (though not shown), the return value is adequately handled. Minor gaps exist for error conditions and prerequisites, but overall it is sufficient for a merge operation.

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?

Despite schema description coverage being 0%, the description adds value by explaining the exclusive OR relationship between 'file' and 'string' parameters, and clarifies that 'confirm_time' is for rollback timeout. This goes beyond the schema's individual descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'merge', the resource 'configuration', and the source ('file or inline string'). It also differentiates from siblings like vyos_load_config by explaining the merge semantics (adds/overwrites without removing unrelated config).

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 explains what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like vyos_set or vyos_load_config. It implies usage through the merge behavior and commit-confirm support, but lacks explicit guidance on exclusions or context.

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