push_config

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: config is stored and loads on next boot (delayed effect), IOL L2 switches require specific command order, VPCS nodes ignore startup-config. This fully informs the agent of consequences.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: main action, IOL caveat, VPCS caveat. Front-loaded with purpose, no redundant phrasing.

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?

Provides important behavioral context and usage caveats, but lacks any parameter descriptions. Given the tool has 3 required parameters and an output schema, the description is incomplete without parameter guidance.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters, but it does not. No information about what the config string should contain, how to specify node_id, or format of lab_path. This is a critical gap.

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 the action 'push a startup-config' and the target resource 'to a node'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like export_config or get_node_config by specifying it's for pushing a startup config that loads on next boot.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use (push startup config) and when not to use (VPCS nodes ignore startup-config). Also gives a critical workaround for IOL L2 switches regarding 'vtp mode transparent' before VLAN entries.

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