set_static_lease

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the tool does NOT check IP conflicts, saves the router config, is safe to re-run with the same values, and takes effect only on next DHCP lease renewal. These are meaningful behavioral traits that the structured annotations do not convey.

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 dense but well-structured: definition, usage condition, alternative, conflict caveat, idempotency, parameter nuance, and effect timing each earn their place. It is front-loaded with the action and scope and contains 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 description covers prerequisites, conflict-checking guidance, side effects, persistence, timing, and parameter semantics. With an output schema present, nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra parameter meaning by clarifying that the optional name is only the dhcp-host label and by pointing to rename_device for changing the web-UI display name, which goes slightly beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Reserve a fixed IP for a MAC address (static DHCP lease) and save the router config.' It also names and distinguishes sibling tools like pin_device and rename_device, so an agent can clearly identify what set_static_lease does and what it does not do.

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?

It gives an explicit when-to-use condition ('Use when you already know the MAC'), names the preferred alternative for connected devices (pin_device), and instructs calling find_free_ip or list_static_leases first because this tool does not check conflicts. This leaves no ambiguity about tool selection.

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