getSitesApsTrunkSetting

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only repeats the tool name, providing no information about side effects, permissions, rate limits, or read-only nature. This is insufficient for an agent to understand behavioral traits.

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?

While the description is extremely short, it under-specifies the tool's behavior, effectively being a tautology of the name. It fails to include valuable context that would justify its brevity.

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 output schema and nested object parameters, the description should explain what a 'trunk setting' is or outline the response structure. Its single sentence is insufficient for complete understanding.

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%, so the input schema already documents each parameter's meaning. The description adds no new semantic information beyond the schema, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate given schema coverage.

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 trunk setting for an AP, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that target other AP settings (e.g., getSitesApsBridge, getSitesApsChannelLimit) by explicitly naming 'trunk setting'.

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 alternatives, nor are there exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. While parameter descriptions hint at usage (e.g., siteId defaulting), the description itself offers no context for tool selection.

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