enable_interface

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint=true. The description adds that apply requires explicit confirmation, which is key behavioral context. However, it does not explain the interplay between dry_run and confirmation parameters, nor other potential side effects.

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 sentence, very concise and front-loaded. While efficient, it could be slightly expanded to cover parameter details without losing conciseness.

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?

As a destructive tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description lacks guidance on parameter usage, expected return values, and prerequisites. It is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly without additional 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%. The description only mentions 'Preview/apply' and 'confirmation', providing minimal additional meaning. It does not clarify dry_run's role (e.g., default true) or what confirmation string is expected.

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 states 'Preview/apply interface enable' which clearly identifies the verb (enable) and resource (interface) and distinguishes between preview and apply modes. However, it does not specify what enabling an interface means (e.g., administratively enable).

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 that apply requires a confirmation, hinting at usage context (preview vs. apply). But it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over siblings like shutdown_interface or set_port_vlan.

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