getApGeneralConfig

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns stored configuration (not runtime status), which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, if any side effects exist, or rate limits. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 consists of two concise sentences that immediately state the purpose and differentiate from a sibling tool. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value. Ideal length for an AI agent.

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 lack of output schema, the description compensates by listing example return fields. It references sibling tools for parameter discovery. For a simple configuration retrieval tool with three parameters, the description is nearly complete. Could mention pagination or rate limits, but these are unlikely to be relevant here.

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% with detailed descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds external references (e.g., 'Use listDevices to find AP MACs', 'Use listSites to discover available site IDs') that significantly enhance parameter understanding. This goes well beyond the schema alone.

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 'Get general configuration for an access point' and enumerates the returned fields (device name, LED settings, country/region, etc.). It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool getApDetail by noting 'this returns stored configuration' vs runtime status. Purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 provides clear guidance: 'Use getApDetail for runtime status; this returns stored configuration.' This helps the agent choose between the two tools. However, it does not list other alternatives or explicitly state when not to use the tool. Overall, good context for usage.

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