client_connectivity

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

No annotations provided. The description adds only that it is read-only ([READ]), but does not disclose permissions, data freshness, or what happens if client is not found.

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?

Very short (two lines), to the point, but uses unstructured text for args. Could benefit from listing or clearer formatting.

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?

Simple tool (3 params, no nested objects). Describes output stats but no response format or error handling. Adequate for a minimal tool but could add more context.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage. Description adds minimal meaning: target is from config and optional, client_id is from client_list (MAC). Lacks explanations for network_id and client_id formats.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves client connection-quality stats (assoc/auth/dhcp/dns/success) with a [READ] prefix. It implies the tool is for connectivity data, but does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like client_get or client_usage.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Mentions omitting target for default but no broader context or exclusions.

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