get_bandwidth_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states the basic function (get stats) and does not specify details like units, time range, aggregation scope, or whether the data is real-time or historical. No side effects or authorization needs are mentioned, leaving significant ambiguity.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately conveys the tool's purpose and is appropriately concise.

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?

For a simple, parameterless getter, the description is adequate but not complete. It mentions the two outputs (total usage and max line rates) but omits units, scope (e.g., all interfaces, current session), and any caveats. Without an output schema, the description should convey more about what the returned data represents.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so nothing is needed to clarify parameter meanings. The description does not add parameter details, but none are required. Baseline 4 is appropriate for no-parameter tools.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get total bandwidth usage and max line rates.' This clearly states what the tool does and is not a tautology. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_device_stats, though the scope ('total') hints at aggregate-level data.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention whether to use it for overall network monitoring or differentiate from get_wan_status or get_device_stats. There is no explicit context or exclusion.

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