create_openvpn_client

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

While annotations already indicate this is a mutating (readOnlyHint=false) but non-destructive (destructiveHint=false) operation, the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not disclose prerequisites (e.g., existing CA/cert), whether the OpenVPN service is restarted, or the effect of apply_immediately.

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, direct sentence with no fluff, front-loading the verb and object. Every word is necessary and informative.

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 tool with 22 parameters and an output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain prerequisites or relationships with sibling OpenVPN tools, though the schema covers the input parameters comprehensively. It is adequate but lacks context about when this tool is appropriate in a broader workflow.

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 22 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), which meets the baseline for high schema coverage. The tool description itself does not add any parameter-level information, but the schema is sufficiently self-documenting.

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 specific verb 'Create' and the resource 'OpenVPN client instance', which uniquely identifies this action and distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_openvpn_client, delete_openvpn_client, and create_openvpn_server.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of the relationship to update_openvpn_client, delete_openvpn_client, or create_openvpn_server, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name alone.

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