Runs a bounded download speed test to measure network throughput, defaulting to Cloudflare and supporting configurable targets; rate-limited to once per minute.
Bounded download speed test (Cloudflare default, configurable). Rate-limited 1/min.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so description must convey behavior. It discloses rate limiting (1/min) and that the test is 'bounded' and uses Cloudflare by default, which are useful behavioral traits. However, it doesn't explain what 'bounded' means (e.g., data cap or time limit) or whether any permissions are needed.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core function and key constraint. No wasted words.
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?
For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it does and a key constraint (rate limit). However, the mention of 'configurable' is confusing since there are no parameters, and 'bounded' remains undefined.
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?
No parameters, so semantics are not applicable; baseline 4.
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?
States 'download speed test' as the core action, distinguishing it from other network diagnostic siblings which don't perform speed tests. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, and 'bounded' is somewhat vague.
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?
No indication of when to use this tool versus other network tools (e.g., net.health, net.ping). The rate limit is mentioned but not as usage guidance or exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.