get_openvpn_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing the tool as a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral value by enumerating the exact kinds of data returned (connection status, connected clients, traffic stats, uptime), going beyond the 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every phrase adds information. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 tool is simple with no parameters, the annotations cover the safety profile, and the output schema exists. The description adequately describes what the tool returns and its scope, making it complete for an agent to decide when to use it.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered by virtue of having no inputs. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.

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 it gets runtime status for all OpenVPN server and client instances, with specific details like connection status, connected clients, traffic statistics, and uptime. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_openvpn_server_status and get_openvpn_client_status, which focus on individual components.

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 implies the tool is used to get a comprehensive view of all OpenVPN tunnels, which is clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclude cases where a more specific status tool should be used, so it stops short of a 5.

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