get_openvpn_client_config

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the readOnlyHint annotation already states. It does not disclose what the config content represents, whether it requires authentication, or any caveats about sensitive data. The annotation covers read-only safety, but the description contributes no extra transparency.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 no-parameter read-only getter with an output schema and readOnly annotation, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it could benefit from noting that this returns client config as opposed to server config, or that it may contain sensitive keys. Given the low complexity, the current level is fairly complete.

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 baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are needed. The schema is trivially complete.

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 '获取 OpenVPN 客户端配置' clearly states the verb (get) and resource (OpenVPN client configuration). It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly naming OpenVPN, although it essentially restates the tool name without additional detail.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_pptp_client_config or get_openvpn_server_config. The description lacks any mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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