v2_ssids

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: passphrases are redacted unless showSecrets is passed, and it enumerates the config surface returned. It does not mention pagination or response shape, but the redaction note is genuinely valuable for an agent.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the scope and ending with the one conditional flag that changes output. The field enumeration is long but each item conveys what the config payload covers.

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, the description usefully enumerates the returned config fields and flags the passphrase redaction behavior. The only meaningful gap is the unexplained siteId parameter, which keeps it from being fully 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 description coverage is 0% for two parameters. The description explains showSecrets ('Passphrases redacted unless showSecrets'), adding real meaning, but siteId is never mentioned, leaving half the parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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 specific resource and verb-scope ('Full config of every SSID') and enumerates the exact fields returned, so an agent knows this is a read of SSID configuration rather than a mutation. It does not explicitly name a sibling like v2_set_ssid or v2_ssid_broadcast, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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 statement of when to use this versus v2_set_ssid, v2_ssid_broadcast, or v2_get. Usage is only implied by the read-only nature of the description; no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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