opn_list_dhcp_leases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists leases and returns a dict with address, mac, hostname. It does not mention side effects, but since it's a read operation, it's inherently non-destructive. A perfect score would require explicit statement of read-only nature, but the description is still transparent enough.

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 very concise: 5 sentences, each serving a clear purpose. It is well-structured with purpose first, then usage instruction, warning, recommendation, and return format. No redundant or extraneous information.

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?

Given that the tool has an output schema, the description does not need to fully detail return values, but it summarizes the key fields. The description covers purpose, usage conditions, and return format adequately for a simple list tool. No gaps.

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 has 0 parameters, so the description does not need to explain any. Schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). Baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description adds value by specifying the output fields.

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 clearly states the tool lists DHCPv4 leases specifically from the ISC DHCP server, distinguishing it from sibling tools for other DHCP backends. It specifies the action (list), resource (DHCPv4 leases), and context (legacy ISC DHCP server).

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 explicitly says when to use the tool (when OPNsense uses ISC DHCP plugin), warns that ISC DHCP is being phased out in favor of dnsmasq or Kea, and recommends checking the backend first with opn_scan_config. This provides clear guidance and alternatives.

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