opnsense_diag_arp_table

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

No annotations provided, so the description must convey behavior. It correctly indicates a read operation ('Show') and optional filtering. Does not mention permissions, output format, or side effects, but this aligns with the simplicity of the 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?

Single sentence with no fluff. Front-loads the primary action ('Show the ARP table') and appends the option for filtering. Every word adds value.

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 simple read-only diagnostic tool with three optional filters and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers what the tool does and the filtering capabilities. A higher score would require more detail on output format or behavior, but it is not necessary here.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter described. The description adds no new information beyond 'optionally filter by IP, MAC, or interface', so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Show' and resource 'ARP table' with the clarifying parenthetical 'IP-to-MAC mappings', making the purpose unmistakable. It is distinct from sibling diag tools like DNS lookup or ping.

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?

Implied usage: retrieving ARP table entries, optionally filtered. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the name and description suffice for a simple read operation.

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