toggle_wifi

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 does not mention whether toggling requires permissions, what happens if WiFi is already in the requested state, or any side effects like disconnecting existing networks. This is a significant gap.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loading the purpose and then clearly explaining the parameter. Every word earns its place with no wasted text.

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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the core action and parameter for correct invocation. However, it lacks any mention of when to use it or alternatives, which would enhance completeness for an agent navigating many sibling tools.

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 description explains the 'enabled' parameter as 'True to enable WiFi, False to disable', which adds meaning beyond the schema's bare type and title. With schema description coverage at 0%, this explanation is essential and effectively compensates.

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 explicitly states 'Enable or disable WiFi.' which is a clear, specific verb+resource action. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_wifi_network, which presumably retrieves network information, and other toggle tools like toggle_mute.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. It simply states the action without contextualizing it relative to get_wifi_network or other network-related tools.

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