networks-list-linklayer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It marks the operation as read-only but omits behavioral details such as pagination, rate limits, or result ordering. The description does not disclose potential large result sets or any additional behaviors beyond listing.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded and concise, with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the core functionality.

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 simple list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks usage guidelines and behavioral details like pagination. It covers the main purpose but misses context that would help an agent handle potential large responses or filtering nuances.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description does not add meaning beyond the schema for either parameter. The description reinforces the resource scope but provides no additional syntax or format details. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema already describes the parameters.

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 that the tool lists LLDP and CDP information for all discovered devices and connections, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like switch-list-ports or appliance-list-vlans by focusing on link-layer discovery protocols.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description includes only a read-only hint but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context, nor differentiation from other listing tools.

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