getRFScanResult

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the result is stored (not real-time) and that a scan is prerequisite, but lacks details on error handling, rate limits, or authorization requirements. The deprecation is a notable behavioral disclosure.

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 plus a brief note, front-loaded with the deprecation marker. Every sentence adds value: deprecation warning, purpose, data returned, prerequisite. No unnecessary content.

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?

Without an output schema, the description lists the key data returned (neighbouring networks, utilization, interference, RSSI). It mentions the prerequisite scan. It does not detail structure or pagination, but for a deprecated tool, the information is sufficient for basic usage.

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%, and the description adds minimal value beyond the schema—only the workflow tip to use triggerRfScan first. The parameters are well-documented in the schema itself, so the description does not significantly enhance understanding of individual parameters.

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 retrieves the last RF scan results for an access point, including specific data types (neighbouring networks, utilization, interference, RSSI). The deprecation note is upfront, and the purpose is distinct from sibling tools.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use triggerRfScan first before calling this tool. The deprecation warning serves as a strong indicator to avoid if possible. However, no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios are mentioned beyond deprecation.

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