kick_pppoe_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral details. It only says 'kick offline' but fails to explain side effects, irreversibility, permission requirements, or impact on the user's session. This is inadequate for a mutating action.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It omits critical information while not adding any explanatory value beyond 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?

Even though the tool has a single parameter, the description is incomplete: it lacks information about expected input, output, errors, or relation to PPPoE online users. The presence of an output schema is not enough to compensate for the missing context.

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 sole parameter 'username' has no schema description and the description does not clarify what format or type of username is expected (e.g., PPPoE account name, session ID). With 0% schema coverage, the description fails to compensate.

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 '踢下线指定用户' clearly states the action (kick offline) and the target (specified user), aligning exactly with the tool name kick_pppoe_user. It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like list_pppoe_online_users.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, prerequisites (e.g., listing online users first), or how it differs from other user-management tools. Users are left to infer the intended context.

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