zyxel_show_mac_table

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Display', which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explain whether the connection must be established, the output format, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a network device tool.

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 states the core function without fluff. It is appropriately sized for a simple display operation, though it could benefit from a second sentence about filtering capabilities.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't mention return value specifics, the need for an active connection (as implied by sibling tools like zyxel_connect), or whether the output is paginated or tabular. This prevents an agent from fully understanding the tool's behavior.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter (vlan, address, interface) having a clear description. The tool description adds no additional semantic information about these parameters, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already provides sufficient detail.

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 the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Display MAC address table'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like zyxel_clear_mac_table because 'display' is clearly a read operation. However, it doesn't mention that filtering by VLAN, address, or interface is possible, which could be considered part of the purpose.

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 versus alternatives like zyxel_show_arp_table or zyxel_show_interfaces. It simply says what it does without providing context about typical use cases or prerequisites such as an active connection.

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