getWlanGroupList

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly confirm side effects, authentication needs, response format, or pagination. The added context about WLAN groups and the wlanId linkage is useful but incomplete.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence earns its place. The first sentence states what the tool does, the second provides context, and the third connects to the next workflow step without fluff.

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 one-parameter list tool, the description covers the core purpose and provides a useful output hint ('Use the wlanId from this list'). However, with no annotations and no output schema, it would benefit from clarifying siteId semantics and the expected response shape. The description is minimally viable but leaves some context gaps.

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 0%, so the description needs to compensate for the undocumented siteId parameter. The description mentions 'in a site' and 'wlanId' in output, but it does not explicitly explain the siteId input, whether it is required, or where it comes from. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds minimal semantic value 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 a specific action and resource: 'Get the list of WLAN groups configured in a site.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling getSsidList by explaining that WLAN groups contain SSIDs, so an agent can tell which tool to use first.

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 gives clear sequential guidance: 'Use the wlanId from this list to call getSsidList.' This establishes when this tool fits into a workflow, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to other sibling tools.

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