nordvpn_diagnose

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

No annotations are provided, so the description partially carries the burden. It lists what checks are performed but does not disclose side effects, safety profile, or output format. Since it's a diagnostic, likely safe, but minimal behavioral context is given.

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 that directly states the purpose. However, it appears truncated (ends with 'supported...'), reducing completeness slightly. One sentence earns its place.

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?

Despite having no parameters and no annotations, the description is incomplete—truncated and lacks details on return values, output format, or whether it performs any side effects. For a diagnostic tool, more context is expected.

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?

There are no parameters, so the input schema provides complete coverage. The description adds meaning by enumerating the diagnostic areas (installation, login, etc.), which helps agents understand what the tool returns.

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 runs a diagnostic check on NordVPN, listing specific aspects (installation, login state, connection status, kill switch). It is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'nordvpn_status' which likely only shows current status.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'nordvpn_status' or 'run_diagnostics'. Usage is implied by the diagnostic nature, but no when-not-to or alternative comparisons are given.

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