get_connected_devices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool merges ARP table and DHCP leases, which is a behavioral trait. It appropriately implies a read-only operation with no destructive effects, though it does not detail performance or permission requirements.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every part is useful: the action, the resource, the data source, and the output fields.

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 has 0 parameters, no annotations, and no complex output schema, the description is fully adequate. It explains what the tool does, how it combines data, and what information is returned, leaving no gaps.

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 tool has 0 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by specifying the output fields (IP, MAC, hostname), which goes beyond the schema and provides additional context for the agent.

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 'Get list of connected devices' with a specific verb and resource, and adds detail 'merged ARP table + DHCP leases', distinguishing it from siblings like get_dhcp_leases that return only DHCP leases.

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 a comprehensive list of connected devices, but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives such as get_dhcp_leases or get_active_connections, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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