get_client_mobility_trail

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

No annotations provided, but the description clarifies behavior: returns time-series table with APs, times, SSIDs; defaults to last 3 hours. Does not mention errors or limits, but is reasonably transparent for a read operation.

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?

Concise with a clear heading, brief summary, and structured Args section. A minor redundancy in the first two sentences, but overall efficient and well-organized.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and parameters. It lacks mention of error handling or client existence, but is sufficient for correct invocation.

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%, so the description carries full burden. The Args section provides clear, format-specific explanations for each parameter (MAC address format, RFC 3339 for times, and defaults), adding significant value beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves roaming history for a wireless client as a time-series table, specifying AP, time, and SSID. Distinct from sibling tools like find_client_by_mac (current location) or get_clients_trend (aggregate trends).

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?

Explicitly states it is useful for troubleshooting connectivity issues or tracking movement, providing context. Does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear enough for an agent.

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