add_mac_speed_limit

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it merely restates the tool's name. It does not disclose side effects, constraints (e.g., valid ranges for upload_kbps/download_kbps), whether it overwrites existing limits, or any operational impact.

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, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It lacks structure or front-loaded information, providing only a minimal phrase that adds no value over the tool name.

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 mutation tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and a non-trivial schema, the description is profoundly incomplete. It does not address return values, error scenarios, prerequisites, or interactions with existing MAC speed limits, making it insufficient for safe and correct 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 schema has 6 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter beyond its bare name, leaving the agent without guidance on units, valid values, or the meaning of optional fields like time_range, enabled, and comment.

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 '添加 MAC 限速' (Add MAC speed limit) clearly states a specific action (add) on a specific resource (MAC speed limit), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_mac_speed_limits and delete_mac_speed_limit. The intent is unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_ip_speed_limit or add_connection_limit. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or any context for choosing this tool.

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