getDashboardWifiSummary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only names the return fields, omitting details such as whether the data is real-time or cached, required permissions, or any side effects. While the tool is likely read-only, the description does not explicitly state this.

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 of 20 words that immediately states the tool's purpose and lists the fields. There is no redundant information, and the structure is perfectly front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain the response structure. It lists the fields but does not clarify how they are organized (e.g., whether channel utilization is a nested object). The description is adequate for basic understanding but lacks detail on the output format, which is needed given the lack of an output schema.

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% (both siteId and customHeaders have descriptions in the schema). The tool description adds no additional parameter information beyond what is already in the schema, so it does not enhance understanding beyond the structured input.

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 the tool retrieves a WiFi summary for a site dashboard and lists the exact fields returned: total APs, connected AP count, wireless client count, channel utilization per band, and SSID count. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('WiFi summary for a site dashboard'), and the listed fields distinguish it from sibling dashboard summaries like getDashboardOverview.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent to infer appropriateness solely from the tool name and field list.

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