v2_set_ap_ssid

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

Annotations cover safety (destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), but the description adds real value beyond them: it locates the state in ssidOverrides[].ssidEnable, clarifies the write is per-AP and on-air-immediate, and documents a read-only/dry-run mode that returns the payload instead of sending it. Permissions and error behavior remain unstated.

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, front-loaded with the core action and scope, then the mechanism, then use cases. No padding, though the bracketed mode note is slightly cramped against the usage sentence.

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?

With no output schema and annotations that only carry safety hints, the description covers the essential semantics of a per-AP mutation (idempotency implied, dry-run path, where state lives). It is short of complete because multi-param addressing (apMac vs apName vs siteId) is never addressed.

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 description coverage is only 17% and six parameters are present, yet the description only alludes to dryRun via the READ-ONLY MODE note and never explains apMac, apName, siteId, or ssidName. It does not compensate for the schema gap; the ssidOverrides[].ssidEnable reference is a data-shape pointer, not parameter guidance.

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?

States a precise verb pair (enable/disable) and a tightly scoped resource (one SSID on ONE access point), and explicitly distinguishes itself from a global toggle by noting there is no global enable field. An agent can separate it from v2_set_ssid and v2_set_ssid_broadcast without opening a schema.

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?

Gives two concrete use cases (keep an SSID in one room, cut beacon overhead on a busy band) and forecloses the wrong mental model by saying the on-air state is per-AP in ssidOverrides[].ssidEnable. It does not explicitly name the sibling tool to use for global SSID changes, so it falls short of 5.

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