list_interfaces

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

No annotations exist, but the description accurately reflects a read-only listing operation with no side effects. It doesn't mention potential latency or data size, but for a simple listing tool, the transparency is adequate.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately follow with usage guidance. No redundant or missing 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?

For a tool with no parameters and a straightforward listing task, the description fully covers what the tool does and when to use it. No output schema needed for such a simple result.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters (100% coverage), so no parameter documentation is needed. The description correctly lists the output categories, which is sufficient.

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?

Description states 'List available CAN interface types, channels, and current connection status' with a clear verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools by positioning it as a first-step discovery tool.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this first to confirm what hardware/channels are available,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. Does not list alternatives, but the directive is unambiguous for a discovery tool among siblings like connect or capture.

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