zte_get_dhcp_leases

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by listing the returned fields (IP, MAC, hostname, etc.), which is useful beyond the annotations. No mention of other behavioral traits like pagination or rate limits, but the tool is simple with no parameters.

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?

A single sentence that is clear, concise, and front-loaded with the action ('Lista') and the object ('dispositivos conectados al router'). Every word is earned.

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 the tool has no parameters, an output schema exists (though not shown), and annotations provide safety signals, the description is complete. It identifies what the tool returns and is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it.

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 tool has no parameters, so the description cannot add parameter semantics. The baseline is 4 as per guidelines.

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 it lists connected devices with specific fields (IP, MAC, hostname, connection type, lease expiration). It distinguishes from siblings like 'zte_get_wifi_clients' which likely focuses on WiFi only.

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?

While the purpose is clear, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'zte_get_wifi_clients') or when not to use it. Usage context is implied but not stated.

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