List IP Pools

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds minimal behavioral context. It mentions filtering and pagination, which are consistent with a read operation, but does not elaborate on other traits like rate limits or performance.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 list tool with comprehensive parameter schema and annotations highlighting safety, the description covers the key behaviors (filtering, pagination). The absence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return format. Minor omission: could mention default router behavior, but that's already in schema.

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%, with each parameter (routerId, name, limit, offset) well-described. The description reiterates 'filtering by name and pagination' but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List'), the resource ('IP address pools'), and the context ('on a MikroTik router'). It also mentions filtering and pagination, differentiating it from sibling tools like manage_ip_pool.

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 listing IP pools with optional filters and pagination, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusion conditions. Given the large set of sibling list tools, more guidance would be helpful.

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