listClientsActivity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the tool is read-only and returns time-series data, but does not address permissions, pagination, or the meaning of 'time snapshot' beyond the parameters. More detail on the behavior would improve transparency.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core action and output, the second adds usefulness. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 no output schema, the description provides a good overview of the return structure (time-series with new, active, disconnected clients). However, it omits details like the time unit of snapshots or any pagination, leaving some gaps for a comprehensive understanding.

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 input schema already describes 3 of 4 parameters (75% coverage). The description adds the concept of 'time snapshot' but does not link it to the start/end parameters or explain defaults if omitted. Since schema coverage is high, the description adds marginal value, scoring a baseline 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('client activity statistics'), clearly indicating it returns time-series data for client trends. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'over time' and including both wireless and wired clients, setting it apart from tools like 'listClients' or 'getDashboardTrafficActivities'.

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 states it is 'useful for monitoring client connection trends and activity patterns', providing clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternative tools, missing a chance to fully guide selection.

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