analyze_hotspot20

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only names modes without explaining side effects, required permissions, or whether the tool is destructive. Lacks safety or impact information.

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 sentences: first sentence states the main purpose, second lists modes with brief explanations. No wasted words, front-loaded key information.

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 exists, so the description should explain what each mode returns. It does not mention return values, expected results, or error conditions. For a multi-mode tool, this is a gap.

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?

The description adds value beyond the schema by stating that auth_method is required for assess mode, osu_enabled is used by assess mode, and hs20_version is required for assess mode. This clarifies parameter usage context.

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 is a unified Hotspot 2.0 / Passpoint analysis tool with three distinct modes (assess, attack, defense). It differentiates from sibling tools by being specific to Hotspot 2.0, not general Wi-Fi analysis.

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 lists modes but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like analyze_wifi_security or find_wifi_attacks. There is no 'when to use' or 'when not to use' advice.

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