getRFScanResult

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 deprecation, that the endpoint returns stored results (not real-time), and lists the types of data returned. It does not discuss authentication or rate limits, but the read-only nature is implied by 'Get' and the lack of side effects mentioned.

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?

Three sentences, front-loading deprecation and purpose, then data content, then prerequisite. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

No output schema, but the description enumerates the kind of data returned (neighboring networks, per-channel utilization, interference, RSSI), which suffices. Parameter descriptions are covered by schema. The tool's role among 80+ siblings is clear from its name and description.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no significant meaning beyond the schema descriptions; it mentions using listDevices to find AP MACs, which is already in the schema for apMac. No additional parameter semantics.

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 verb (Get) and resource (last RF scan results for an access point), specifies it is deprecated, and lists the data returned (neighboring networks, per-channel utilization, interference, RSSI). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on RF scan results, which is unique among the sibling list.

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?

Explicitly mentions using triggerRfScan first to initiate a fresh scan, and notes this endpoint returns the most recent stored results. Also flags deprecation, which advises caution. Missing explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references, but the prerequisite is clear.

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