Trace a mesh path

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

The description adds timeout behavior ('A path that doesn't respond returns a timeout') but does not disclose whether the trace modifies state or requires specific permissions. Annotations are minimal (readOnlyHint: false, but no further context).

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 two sentences, directly stating the purpose and parameter usage without any fluff. It is front-loaded with the core function.

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?

The description covers the essential aspects: what the tool does, how to use parameters, and the timeout condition. Given that there is an output schema (not shown), not detailing the return structure 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?

The input schema already describes both parameters with examples (100% coverage). The description adds context about their usage (explicit path vs. known out-path for node), which helps differentiate the two options.

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 the action ('Trace a route through the mesh') and what it reports (SNR per hop). It distinguishes from sibling tools like reset_path or set_contact_path by focusing on tracing rather than modifying paths.

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 explains when to use the tool: to trace a route either by explicit path or by known node. It implies alternatives for path management but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it.

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