update_vlan

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update' without explaining whether it performs a partial update, what happens to omitted fields, required permissions, idempotency, or any side effects.

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 too sparse to be considered good conciseness. While it is short, the single sentence adds no value beyond the tool name and fails to earn its place, resulting in under-specification rather than appropriate brevity.

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's complexity (10 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It provides no context about required fields, update behavior, or how this tool fits into the broader VLAN management workflow.

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 0% and the description does not mention any parameters or fields. The schema lists 10 parameters, but the description adds no meaning beyond the raw property names, making it impossible for an agent to understand parameter semantics.

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 'Update a VLAN' simply restates the tool name 'update_vlan' with no added detail. It is a tautology that does not specify what aspects of a VLAN can be updated or how it differs from related tools like create_vlan or delete_vlan.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where update_vlan is preferred over create_vlan or delete_vlan.

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