proxmox_get_network

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation through 'Get' but does not disclose what the response contains, whether special permissions are required, or any side effects. This minimal statement is insufficient for a tool without annotation support.

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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no redundant words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, earning a high score for structure and efficiency.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description lacks context about the output or operational details. Without an output schema, it would benefit from specifying what 'network configuration' includes (e.g., interfaces, IP addresses). It is adequate but minimal, leaving some ambiguity about the exact scope of the result.

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 input schema fully describes both parameters ('Node name' and 'Proxmox server device ID'), so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The baseline score of 3 applies since the schema covers 100% of parameter semantics.

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 a specific action ('Get') and a specific resource ('network configuration of a Proxmox node'), making it unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling Proxmox tools like proxmox_get_nodes or proxmox_node_status by focusing on the network configuration aspect.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tools for related tasks, leaving usage context entirely implicit.

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