wifi_interfaces

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

The behavior of auto-detecting the API path is disclosed, which is a key trait. However, no annotations are provided, and the description does not cover error cases, performance, or the effect of the operation (though likely read-only).

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 concise and front-loaded. Every word adds value; no waste.

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 simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on the return structure or fields. Sibling tools suggest other WiFi-related tools exist, but no cross-referencing is provided.

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 exist, so the description does not need to add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 4 for zero parameters is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states it lists WiFi interfaces and mentions auto-detection between wifiwave2 and legacy. The name and description make the purpose clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_interfaces or wifi_radios.

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 (e.g., list_interfaces for all interfaces, wifi_radios for radios). The description only states what it does, not when to use it.

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