cmw_wlan_set_bandwidth

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action with no mention of side effects, dependencies, return format, or whether a connection is required. For a mutation tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the essential action and accepted values efficiently.

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?

The tool is a simple setter with no output schema, but the description is extremely minimal. It lacks context about prerequisites, effects, or how it fits into the WLAN configuration workflow. While it is functionally understandable, it is not fully complete for an agent seeking robust guidance.

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 50%, with host and port undocumented. The description only restates the enum values for bandwidth, adding little beyond the schema. It does not clarify the purpose of host, port, or meas_instance, so it fails to compensate for the schema gaps.

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 'Set' with a clear resource 'WLAN channel bandwidth' and enumerates the allowed values (20/40/80/160 MHz). This fully distinguishes it from sibling setters like cmw_wlan_set_frequency or cmw_wlan_set_expected_power.

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 implies the tool is used to configure WLAN bandwidth, but it does not state when to use this versus alternatives, any prerequisites (e.g., WLAN standard configured), or when not to use it. This is implied context rather than explicit guidance.

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