openclaw_setup

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the side effect of closing the matching client connection and re-handshaking, and mentions env var override. However, it does not discuss error handling, validation, or authorization requirements, which are important for a setup tool.

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 concise paragraph of five sentences, each adding valuable information. It front-loads the main purpose and avoids redundancy.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, instance naming, env var override, and side effect. However, it omits return value and error behavior, which would improve completeness for an agent.

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%, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds minor context about default instances and env var precedence, but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 verb 'persist' and the resource 'named OpenClaw gateway config (URL + token) to local store'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like openclaw_setup_show and openclaw_setup_list, which are for viewing/deleting, by focusing on saving/creation.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: to persist config, manage multiple instances, and leverage env var fallback. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings via naming, but does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives like openclaw_setup_show for viewing.

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