configure_cpu_ethernet

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

No annotations provided, but description fully discloses behavioral traits: updates all stored copies, reloads project, leaves project unsaved, requires build_project and save_project, and mentions failure condition when service flags are disabled for CRA. Transparent about destructive side effects.

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?

Description is concise given the complexity, starting with main purpose and then necessary details. Slightly dense but no wasted sentences. Could be broken into bullet points for clarity, but still efficient.

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?

With 12 parameters, 0 required, no output schema, and no annotations, description covers the core functionality, parameter meanings, side effects, and an error case. It does not explain return value or validation, but given the tool's nature (configuration action), that is acceptable.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description must compensate. It explains main IP, subnet, gateway, ip_a/b/d, and service flags with their meanings. Service flag default -1 is explained. However, does not specify IP format or valid ranges, but covers semantics adequately.

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 it configures the M580 CPU's embedded Ethernet, listing specific parameters (main IP, subnet, gateway, HSBY addresses, service flags). It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by providing unique functionality.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use: for configuring CPU Ethernet and service flags. States service argument encoding (-1 unchanged, 0 disable, 1 enable). Warns about requirement for remote EIO drop's CRA and side effects (project reload, unsaved). Gives alternative for slave device gateway-domain warning (use set_dtm_address).

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