Network Topology

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

Annotations state readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=false, but the description does not explain what side effects or remote changes are possible, what topology data is gathered, or why a topology call is not read-only. 'Remote system intelligence via SSH' is too vague to add behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 short but under-specified rather than concise. Two sentence fragments leave the main concept ('network topology') unexplained and do not front-load actionable information.

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?

Even though an output schema and annotations exist, the description omits what topology information is returned and how SSH credentials are used. For a six-parameter, open-world remote-operation tool, it does not give enough context to call it confidently.

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%, so the description need not document the six parameters in detail. However, it adds no meaning about how remote_host, username, identity_file, password_ref, patterns, or log_paths affect topology discovery; baseline 3 is appropriate given the complete schema.

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 mostly restates the title ('Network topology') and adds only a vague phrase, 'Remote system intelligence via SSH.' It does not state a specific action (collect? map? audit?) or distinguish this tool from siblings like tm_system_discover_services or tm_system_get_info.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor about prerequisites such as SSH credentials or when topology discovery is appropriate. The note that it works 'via SSH' gives context but no selection criteria.

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