monitor_wifi_client_list

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

No annotations provided, and the description only states a simple listing without disclosing behavioral traits like permissions, rate limits, data freshness, or side effects. For a read-only operation, it's minimally transparent.

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 conveys the tool's core functionality without any extraneous text. Every word earns its place.

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 description covers the main output (list of clients, AP, signal strength) but omits details like pagination, ordering, or field names. However, an output schema likely exists to fill in those gaps, making it mostly complete.

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 each parameter already has clear descriptions (e.g., 'Filter by Access Point serial number'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 'List all connected WiFi clients with their associated AP and signal strength' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('WiFi clients') and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like monitor_firewall_ip_list or monitor_vpn_ssl_list.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., monitor_wifi_ap_status, monitor_wifi_managed_ap). No context about prerequisites or filters.

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