vrrp_show

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

No annotations are present, so the description is the only source of behavioral disclosure. The explicit 'read-only' flag tells the agent this command will not change device state, which is highly valuable. It does not cover output format or potential side effects, but for a zero-parameter show command the disclosure is reasonably complete.

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 short phrase that front-loads the resource ('VRRP configuration') and the critical read-only property. Every word adds value and there is no filler.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no other description of the result, so the description ought to say a bit more about what is shown. The phrase 'VRRP configuration' only implies the content, leaving the agent to infer the display format. For a no-parameter show tool this is adequate but thin.

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 tool takes no parameters and the schema is empty, so the description has no parameter burden to carry. The description identifies the resource the command is about, which is all the parameter semantics needed here.

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 identifies the resource (VRRP configuration) and the operation mode (read-only), which lets the agent understand this is a non-mutating lookup. It lacks an explicit verb but the tool name plus 'read-only' clearly signals the purpose. It is distinguishable from mutating siblings like vrrp_set and vrrp_reset, though it doesn't differentiate itself from other status show tools.

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 provides no guidance about when to invoke this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of related commands like vrrp_enable, vrrp_set, or ha_show, and no statement about when a user would want the VRRP config rather than another status view.

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