agentest_set_network

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains presets, custom speed/delay, and toggles for wifi and airplane mode. Does not mention side effects or persistence, but simulation behavior is well-covered.

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?

First sentence states purpose, then followed by clear bullet-like listings. Slightly verbose but well-organized and front-loaded. Every part adds value.

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?

No output schema, so description should hint at return value or side effects. It does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., success/failure) or whether changes are persistent. Missing this context.

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 100% with descriptions. Description adds value by explaining preset meanings, custom speed format ('up:down' kbps), and latency as 'min:max' ms, going beyond schema alone.

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 clearly states 'Simulate network conditions on the emulator for testing offline/slow connections.' Verb and resource are specific, and sibling tools are unrelated, so no confusion.

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?

Purpose implies when to use (testing offline/slow connections). Provides presets and custom options but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. Still clear and adequate.

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