swm_snmp

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a write operation and that confirmation is required, which is useful, but it does not describe side effects, reversibility, prerequisites, or what the confirmation flow entails. For a write tool this is a notable gap.

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 short and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than concise. The parenthetical '(write — requires confirmation)' adds a label but no real structure or detail, and the overall definition carries almost no operational content.

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 write tool requiring confirmation, with four undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description is far from complete. An agent cannot determine what to pass, what the tool will change, what confirmation steps are needed, or what the response will be.

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 explains none of the four parameters. The required 'param' field is completely opaque, and user_code, confirm_token, and confirmation_id are left to be guessed from their names. The description does not compensate for the schema's lack of semantic 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 says only 'Switch SNMP (write — requires confirmation)', which restates the tool name and labels it as a write operation without specifying what action is performed on SNMP. It is ambiguous whether this toggles SNMP, updates its configuration, or performs some other write. The many swm_* and switch_* siblings make it impossible to distinguish this tool's purpose from the description alone.

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?

No usage guidance is provided: no indication of when to use this tool versus swm_enable, swm_disable, switch_on, switch_off, or other write tools. The only clue is 'requires confirmation', which implies a workflow need but does not explain when the tool is appropriate.

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