getGatewayLanStatus

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explicitly lists the information returned (link state, speed, duplex, connected device, VLAN). This is a read operation and the description implies no side effects. It could be improved by stating it is read-only or mentioning rate limits, but is still transparent.

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 short sentences: the first states the tool's purpose and output fields; the second gives a necessary prerequisite. Every word is useful, no redundancy. Ideal structure for quick parsing.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description enumerates the return fields (port link state, speed, duplex, connected device, VLAN assignment). With three parameters (one required) and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior and data scope.

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% for all parameters. The description adds value beyond the schema by providing actionable guidance: 'Use listDevices to get the gatewayMac.' This contextual hint helps the agent correctly supply the required parameter.

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 LAN port status for a specific gateway: port link state, speed, duplex, connected device, and VLAN assignment.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('LAN port status for gateway'), and the detail about returned fields distinguishes it from sibling tools like getGatewayWanStatus or getGatewayPorts.

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 a clear prerequisite: 'Use listDevices to get the gatewayMac.' This guides the agent on parameter acquisition. While it doesn't explicitly state when-not-to-use or name alternatives, the specificity of the purpose makes it unambiguous.

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