update_vlan_interface

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the 'existing' constraint but does not disclose what happens if the interface is not found, how optional parameters are treated, or other behavioral nuances. It adds some value beyond annotations but not substantial.

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 (12 words) that directly states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and free of unnecessary detail, earning a high score for conciseness and structure.

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?

Despite having an output schema and annotations, this is a complex mutation tool with 11 parameters and zero schema descriptions. The description provides no context about parameter behavior, edge cases, or usage patterns, making it insufficiently complete for reliable tool selection and invocation.

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% and the description provides no parameter details at all. It merely says 'settings' without explaining any of the 11 parameters (name, new_name, vlan_id, interface, etc.), leaving the agent without guidance on how to use them.

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 ('Updates') with a clear object ('existing VLAN interface's settings') and device ('MikroTik'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_vlan_interface, get_vlan_interface, and remove_vlan_interface.

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 word 'existing' clearly implies this tool is for modifying already-created VLAN interfaces, not for creating new ones. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of full guidance.

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