Resolve IP-to-MAC address mappings by viewing the system ARP cache. Diagnose network connectivity issues by checking which devices are reachable on the local network.
View the system ARP cache (IP to MAC address mappings).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| interface | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'View' conveys a read-only operation and the parenthetical hints at what is returned, but it does not mention interface-specific behavior, output format, or any required privileges. This is minimally adequate for a simple read-only tool.
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 that states both the action and the data being shown. No wasted words or redundant details.
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 core purpose and output concept are clear, and the tool can be called with zero parameters. However, the interface parameter is left unexplained and there is no output detail, leaving noticeable gaps for such a simple tool.
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 schema has 0% description coverage and the description never mentions the 'interface' parameter. An agent has no way to learn whether it filters by network device, is optional, or affects the output.
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 uses a specific action ('View'), names the resource ('system ARP cache'), and clarifies the content with 'IP to MAC address mappings'. This cleanly distinguishes it from network siblings like ping or curl.
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 does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as network/connections or network/ping, nor does it give any exclusion guidance. The usage context is only implied by the action itself.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.