vpn_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'read-only', which is a useful behavioral trait indicating no side effects. However, it does not describe return format, authentication requirements, or any other behaviors. For a simple list tool, this is minimal but acceptable, hence a 3.

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 extremely concise: 'VPN profile list (read-only)'. It is a single phrase, front-loaded, with zero waste. It conveys the essential purpose and behavior efficiently.

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 parameterless list tool, the description covers the basic purpose and read-only behavior. However, it lacks any context about what a VPN profile is, what the list contains, or how it differs from other vpn_* tools. Given the tool's simplicity, this is a moderate gap, but not severe.

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 coverage is trivially 100%. With 0 params, the baseline is 4. The description adds nothing about parameters because there are none, so this 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 states a clear verb and resource: 'VPN profile list' indicates a listing operation. It adds the qualifier 'read-only' which clarifies the tool's nature. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like vpn_remote, vpn_graph, or vpn_setup, so it loses one point for missing sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among many sibling vpn_* and show_* tools, the description does not mention any conditions, exclusions, or context that would help an agent select this specific tool. This is a clear gap.

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