Get WireGuard client QR code

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns by using 'Get' with no side effects. The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying the output format (SVG markup), which is critical for the agent to know the tool returns text/SVG rather than a binary image. It also mentions mobile app scanning, adding usage context.

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, output format, and intended use. No filler or redundant information; every word 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?

For a simple one-parameter read-only operation, the description is complete: it identifies the resource, output format, and use case. The readOnlyHint annotation covers safety, and the schema covers parameter details. The only minor gap is not explicitly addressing potential errors (e.g., invalid clientId) or alternative tool usage, but these are not essential for basic invocation.

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 covers 100% of parameter semantics, with clientId described as 'Numeric ID of the client (see list_clients)'. The description does not add additional parameter details, but none are needed given the schema's thoroughness. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool action ('Get') and the specific resource ('client configuration as a QR code (SVG markup)'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_client_config (which likely returns raw config) by explicitly mentioning QR code and SVG format for mobile app scanning.

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 for scanning with the WireGuard mobile app, but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like get_client_config or get_client. No explicit exclusions or 'when not to use' guidance is provided, so it relies on the reader to infer differentiation.

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