Save the Network to a File

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds genuinely new behavioral context by disclosing that an existing file at that path is overwritten without prompting, and that the saved path is returned. It stops short of stating failure modes (invalid extension, unwritable directory) or whether the network must already be open.

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?

Two front-loaded sentences carry the core action and the overwrite caveat, followed by a short examples block that is clearly delimited. No sentence is redundant with the schema or annotations.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need no elaboration — yet the description still notes the saved path is returned. For a one-parameter save tool with annotations covering the safety profile and overwrite disclosed, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 100% and the single path parameter is already documented as an absolute .pkt/.pka path on the host, so the description only echoes that. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Save the current network as a .pkt file") plus a scope qualifier ("without a dialog", "at an absolute path") that separates it from the GUI-style save and from siblings like export_network_topology or save_device_configuration. An agent can tell what this does and what it does not do without opening any schema.

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 two examples ("Save this topology to ~/labs/campus.pkt", "Back up the network") imply when to reach for it, but there is no explicit routing guidance — nothing says when to prefer export_network_topology, open_network_file, or create_new_network instead, and no prerequisites are named.

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