getSitesApsIpSetting

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool retrieves IP settings, but does not indicate whether it is read-only (implied by 'Get'), error handling, permission requirements, or response behavior. This is insufficient for a tool with no output schema.

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 sentence with no redundancy. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it sacrifices detail for brevity. Could be expanded to include key behavioral or usage context.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should explain what IP settings are returned and any important limitations (e.g., only current settings, not historical). It also does not mention any side effects or prerequisites beyond the parameter hints. Incomplete for a tool with moderate parameter count.

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 schema already covers all three parameters with clear descriptions (100% coverage). The description does not add new semantics beyond the schema, but the schema itself is detailed. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get') and the resource ('IP settings for an AP'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve other AP configurations (e.g., getApGeneralConfig, getApIpv6Config). However, it could be slightly more specific by mentioning what type of IP settings (e.g., DHCP/static).

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 text does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, fallback tools, or exclusions. Although the parameter schema includes hints (e.g., 'Use listSites to discover available site IDs'), the description itself offers no usage direction.

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