configure_vpd

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

With no annotations, the description discloses important behavioral traits: dry_run preview does not apply changes, requires OIDC sign-in, and enforces minimum host thresholds. It does not detail side effects such as persistence or service restart, but covers key behaviors.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and no redundant information. Each sentence adds meaning: purpose, configuration syntax, and prerequisites/constraints.

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 configuration tool with no output schema, the description covers the core aspects: purpose, usage, constraints, and auth. It lacks explicit return value or post-conditions, but is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds practical value by showing default values ('true') and explaining CEL expressions filter by tags, plus ties host count constraints to the expression parameters.

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 configures VPD host selection for the Relayer, with an optional dry_run preview. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on host selection, a unique function not covered by other listed tools.

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?

Provides clear context on when to use: configuring host selection with defaults or CEL expressions, and notes the minimum host count requirement to guide criteria. It mentions the OIDC sign-in prerequisite but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools.

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