interface_traffic_live

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

No annotations provided. The description says 'real-time' and 'sampel' (sample) implying a single read, but lacks details on effects (likely read-only), duration, or safety. Adds basic context but insufficient for full transparency.

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?

Short description with an Args section, but the Args section repeats the schema without adding value. Could be more concise by integrating parameter info.

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. The description mentions 'throughput real-time interface (rx/tx bit-per-detik)' indicating the return value, but does it return both rx and tx separately? Incomplete for a single-sample tool. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 schema has 0% description coverage. The description gives an example 'mis. \'ether1\'' but doesn't explain format, constraints, or default values. Minimal added meaning beyond the schema.

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 action 'Ambil satu sampel' (take one sample) and the resource 'throughput real-time interface (rx/tx bit-per-detik)'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_interfaces' which list interfaces but not traffic.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like other monitoring tools. No mention of exclusions or context.

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