toggle_pppoe_server

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. It only states the toggle action but fails to disclose effects such as whether disabling drops existing PPPoE sessions, whether a restart is required, or whether the change persists across reboots. For a state-changing operation, this is a notable gap.

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 short phrase that directly states the action and resource. It is appropriately sized for a simple toggle function with one parameter, containing no wasted words or redundant information.

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?

Although the tool is simple (one boolean parameter), it controls a server that may have active users, as evidenced by sibling tools like list_pppoe_online_users and kick_pppoe_user. The description provides no consequences, prerequisites, or impact information, making it incomplete for a potentially disruptive network operation.

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 description's "启用/禁用" aligns with the single boolean parameter `enabled`, implying true enables and false disables. However, schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not elaborate on the parameter's meaning beyond what the parameter name already suggests, nor does it mention any nuances or consequences of setting it.

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+resource: "启用/禁用 PPPoE 服务端" (enable/disable PPPoE server). It clearly identifies the target operation and distinguishes itself from sibling toggle tools like toggle_vpn_server and toggle_acl_rule by mentioning the specific resource (PPPoE).

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 implies when to use (when to change the PPPoE server state) but provides no explicit context, alternatives, or exclusions. It does not mention checking current state with get_pppoe_server_config or warn about disconnecting active users, leaving the usage guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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