Device Discover

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only and not idempotent, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond that. It does not disclose whether the trigger is asynchronous, what side effects occur (e.g., polling, ARP/SNMP discovery), or what happens for unknown/nonexistent hostnames.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to stating the action and target, which is the ideal level of brevity for a simple one-parameter operation.

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 a simple one-parameter schema and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about what rediscovery entails, whether it returns immediately or runs asynchronously, and how errors are handled. These gaps could cause an agent to misuse or misinterpret the call despite the simple input.

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%, and the schema already documents hostname as 'Device hostname or ID'. The tool description adds no extra meaning regarding the parameter's format, resolution, or examples, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific action ('trigger') on a specific resource ('device rediscovery') in a named system (LibreNMS). 'Rediscovery' is a distinct operation from sibling tools like device_get or device_update, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as device_update, device_set_maintenance, or device_add. The description does not mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions; usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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