list_wan_configs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description complements this by specifying exactly what data is returned (IP, access method, NIC, VLAN, rate). This adds valuable context beyond the read-only flag, though it does not cover potential behaviors like ordering or result limits. No contradiction with annotations.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource ('List all WAN port configurations') with a parenthetical list of key details. Every word earns its place, and no space is wasted.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool with an output schema, the description is fully adequate. It tells the agent exactly what the tool returns and implies no side effects. The scope of the operation is simple and clearly communicated.

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, so the description carries no parameter burden. It does provide useful context about the output content, which is relevant for understanding the tool's function. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description meets that baseline.

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 lists all WAN port configurations and enumerates the key fields (IP, access method, NIC, VLAN, rate). This specific verb-resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_lan_configs and get_ipv6_wan_config, making its purpose unmistakable.

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?

Usage context is implied: an agent needing WAN port configuration details would use this tool. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives (e.g., list_lan_configs for LAN configs or get_ipv6_wan_config for IPv6-specific WAN info), nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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