toggle_vpn

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the call is blocking and returns success/error, which is useful behavioral context, but omits whether the VPN is affected globally, whether it requires privilege, and whether the toggle is reversible.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the expected interaction pattern. No filler, though it could be slightly more informative without losing brevity.

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 single-parameter toggle with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient: it names the resource, the two actions, and the blocking behavior. It leaves privilege requirements, scope, and failure consequences unspecified, so it is adequate but not rich.

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% and the single 'action' parameter is documented in the schema with an enum and description. The description says 'starts or stops' which mirrors the enum but adds no format or semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (starts or stops) and resource (Lemon iOS VPN), making the operation understandable. Sibling names like toggle_module and set_module_enabled are adjacent in concept but target a different resource, which this description implies rather than explicitly distinguishes.

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 instruction to 'wait for success or error response' implies the tool is synchronous/blocking, giving some usage context. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives (e.g., toggle_module for modules), and no exclusions.

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