getSitesApsOfdma

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation ('Get'), which is appropriate. However, it does not disclose details such as authorization requirements, potential side effects, or output format, leaving some ambiguity for a tool that interacts with external systems.

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 extremely concise at six words, front-loading the core purpose. It is not verbose, though it might benefit from including a brief note on what OFDMA configuration entails without becoming bloated.

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's simplicity (a single configuration retrieval) and 100% schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, the lack of an output schema and any hints about the response structure or content means the agent may need additional context for effective use.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the description adds no extra semantic value beyond what is already in the schema. The baseline score of 3 applies, as the description does not enhance the parameter understanding.

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 'Get OFDMA configuration for an AP' clearly specifies the action (get), the resource (OFDMA configuration), and the scope (an AP). It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools that retrieve other AP-specific configurations like getApRadios or getApGeneralConfig.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternative tools for retrieving AP configurations. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it compares to related siblings, leaving the agent to infer usage without explicit direction.

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