iap_get_networks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Return', which implies a read operation, but it does not mention potential side effects, access requirements, the meaning of 'configured', output format, pagination, or any limitations. Minimal disclosure for a tool with no structured metadata.

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?

Consists of a single sentence with no unnecessary words, front-loading the core purpose. It is appropriately concise for a simple listing tool, though it could be expanded without becoming verbose; the brevity itself is not a flaw here.

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?

With 5 optional parameters and an existing output schema, the description is inadequate. It offers no guidance on parameter semantics, target selection (iap_ip_addr vs cluster_name), the meaning of include_extra, or expected result structure. Without annotations or further context, an agent cannot confidently invoke this tool 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 0%, and the description does not mention any of the parameters (limit, offset, iap_ip_addr, cluster_name, include_extra). It provides zero additional meaning beyond what the schema names suggest, failing to explain how these parameters constrain the result or target the query.

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 action ('Return') and resource ('configured WLAN networks') with a clarifying detail ('SSIDs'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling iap_get_network_detail, which would return specific network details.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions. It only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and siblings.

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