aruba_custom_command

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Execute custom show command', which implies a read operation, but does not confirm whether it is truly read-only, require permissions, or affect state. This is a significant 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 clear sentence with an example. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff. Every word is necessary.

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?

Given the tool is a generic command executor with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It lacks details on command scope (only show commands?), error handling, output format, and whether it supports non-show commands. This is insufficient for an agent to use reliably.

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 coverage is 0% for the single parameter 'command', but the description adds meaning by stating it takes a 'custom show command' and provides an example. This compensates for the empty schema description and helps the agent understand the parameter's purpose.

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?

Description uses verb 'Execute' and specific resource 'custom show command on Aruba controller', with example 'show ap database'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools that are specific get commands, as it is a generic runner for commands not covered by those tools.

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 this tool is for custom show commands not available as dedicated tools, but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. The example 'show ap database' actually corresponds to a sibling tool, which could cause confusion.

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