List PPPoE Clients

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description only adds that it returns specific fields. It does not describe pagination behavior or the meaning of the status filter, which are present in the schema but not in the description.

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 long, front-loading the purpose and key output fields. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

The description covers the main purpose and output fields. However, it could mention that the tool supports pagination via limit and offset parameters, though these are detailed in the schema. For a simple listing tool, the description is nearly 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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the schema with 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or constraints beyond what is already provided in the input schema, so it meets the baseline without adding value.

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 lists PPPoE client interfaces on a MikroTik router and specifies the fields returned (name, parent interface, ISP username, connection status). It uses a specific verb-resource pair and effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like manage_pppoe_client.

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 a read-only query but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks information about prerequisites, such as requiring a router connection, and does not mention when not to use it.

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