speed_test

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, indicating side effects, but the description adds no behavioral context such as expected duration, bandwidth consumption, or output format. It does not contradict the annotations, but it provides zero additional disclosure beyond the structured hints.

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 a single sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. Every word contributes to the purpose, making it appropriately concise.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action and metrics but omits expected output shape, potential latency, or side effects like bandwidth usage. It is minimally viable but leaves a few gaps an agent might need to handle.

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 zero parameters, and the input schema is empty with 100% coverage. With 0 parameters the baseline is 4, and the description adds no parameter detail – none is needed since there are none to document.

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 verb and resource ('Run a network speed test') and explicitly names the metrics covered (download, upload, ping). This differentiates it from siblings like ping_host (which only pings) and get_network_ip (which returns an IP), so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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 implies usage for network performance testing via the parenthetical '(download, upload, ping)', but it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives such as ping_host or get_vnstat_data. There is no 'when not to use' or mention of sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer the decision.

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