fast_forward

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

Annotations already establish that this mutates state but is not destructive. The description adds real behavioral context by explaining what actually changes (spanning tree converges, DHCP leases arrive, routing protocols settle) and the time it saves, which is beyond what the annotations convey.

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 tightly written sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the usage timing following. Every clause earns its place by conveying either effect or timing.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. For a parameterless action tool, the description supplies purpose, effect, and invocation timing, leaving nothing essential missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. Nothing in the description is needed to clarify inputs.

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 names a specific action ('Press Realtime mode's Fast Forward Time button') and states its concrete effect ('timers jump ahead'), which is unambiguous. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like simulation_mode and simulation_step because it scopes itself to Realtime mode's time-advance behavior.

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?

It gives explicit sequencing guidance: 'Call it after cabling or configuring, before testing connectivity.' This is clear contextual instruction, though it does not name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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