Create VLAN Interface

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

Beyond annotations (idempotentHint=true), the description adds that the tool performs idempotency checks and supports dry-run mode, which are not fully captured by annotations alone. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that efficiently convey purpose and key behaviors. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core behaviors (idempotency, dry-run) but lacks information about return values or error handling. For the complexity level, it is still fairly complete.

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 already has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description does not add significant new meaning beyond restating idempotency and dry-run, which are already in the schema via parameter 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 action ('Create a new VLAN interface') and specifies the target device ('on a MikroTik router'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on VLAN interface creation, which is not covered by other manage_* 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?

The description implies usage for creating VLAN interfaces but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like manage_bridge or list_interfaces. No exclusions or context for when not to use it are given.

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