set_smart_connect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does it well: it warns that radios restart and clients drop briefly, which is exactly the disruptive side-effect an agent needs. It omits anything about permissions or return behavior, but the core risk is disclosed.

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 compact sentences front-load the action and immediately follow with the disruption warning and confirm requirement. No wasted text.

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 needn't be explained. For a no-annotation mutation tool the description supplies the key behavioral facts (disruption, confirm gate); only permission requirements and finer parameter detail are 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps 'enabled' via enable/disable and explains 'confirm' as a required safety gate, adding meaningful intent. Both parameters get conceptual treatment, though the boolean types and default for confirm aren't fully spelled out.

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?

States a specific verb (enable/disable) and resource (Smart Connect band steering) plus a parenthetical explaining the feature as a single SSID across bands. An agent can tell what it does, though it doesn't explicitly position it against siblings like set_wifi_band or set_wireless_advanced.

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 'Requires confirm=True' note gives a concrete call prerequisite, which is real usage guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or comparison to the many adjacent wifi-setting tools.

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