Create Firewall

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what it does (create) but gives no context on side effects, whether the firewall starts empty, if activation is required, or if name uniqueness is enforced. This is a minimal disclosure for a mutation tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple create operation and immediately conveys the core action.

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?

While the tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), the overall firewall management context involves creating a firewall, adding rules, and activating it. The description fails to mention that a newly created firewall likely needs further setup (rules, activation), leaving the agent without guidance on next steps.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with the 'name' parameter described as 'Firewall name'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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?

The description 'Create a new firewall' clearly states a specific verb (create) and resource (firewall). It distinguishes from sibling tools like vps_firewall_list, vps_firewall_get, vps_firewall_delete, and vps_firewall_create_rule, making its purpose clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., need for a VPS) or suggest pairing with vps_firewall_create_rule or vps_firewall_activate to complete the firewall setup.

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