show_topology

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses the tool is a read-only display operation ('show', 'displays') and that it requires prior data collection. No side effects or destructive actions are implied, which is accurate for a topology display tool.

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?

Two sentences: the first states the main purpose and format, the second adds a prerequisite. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information. Highly concise and well-structured.

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 simplicity (0 parameters, output schema exists), the description fully covers what the tool does, its output format, and a necessary precondition. It is complete and leaves no ambiguity for an AI agent.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds no parameter info, which is unnecessary. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description does not detract.

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 it shows discovered network topology as an ASCII diagram, displaying devices and interconnections. It distinguishes from siblings like show_topology_json or show_topology_mermaid by specifying the output format as ASCII diagram, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 explicitly states a prerequisite: 'Run discover_topology first to collect data.' This guides when to use the tool. It also implies usage context (after discovery) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or direct to alternatives.

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