Create WireGuard client

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions that keys and IPs are auto-generated by wg-easy and that the new client ID is returned. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, permission requirements, or whether the client is immediately active.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the core action and provide useful follow-up context. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The description is sufficient for a simple creation tool with full schema coverage. It explains the core behavior, auto-generation, and return value. It lacks optional details like default state or uniqueness constraints, but these are not critical for basic usage.

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 input schema fully describes both parameters (name required, expiresAt optional) with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning; it only notes that keys/IPs are generated, which is implied by the tool's purpose.

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 the tool's purpose: creating a new WireGuard client. It specifies the action (create), the resource (WireGuard client), and additional outcomes (generated keys/IPs, returns client ID). The verb 'create' distinguishes it from sibling tools that list, get, update, enable, disable, delete, or fetch configs.

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 implies usage when a new client needs to be added, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_client or enable_client. It provides no exclusion criteria or conditional guidance.

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