List WireGuard clients

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds scope and return content but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting defaults, or authentication requirements. The description is consistent with annotations and provides some useful context, but not extensive.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, and provides just enough detail without unnecessary words.

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 list tool with optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys what the tool returns (status, addresses, traffic statistics). The annotations and schema fill in the remaining details, making the tool sufficiently documented.

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 schema provides 100% coverage for the two parameters, each with descriptions. The tool description does not add further semantic detail beyond what the schema already specifies, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the tool's action ('List all WireGuard clients'), the resource ('of the wg-easy instance'), and what information is included (status, addresses, traffic statistics). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_client, which retrieves a single client.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for listing all clients. While it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, the scope is unambiguous and the sibling tools imply the distinction (e.g., get_client for individual clients).

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