get_interfacesRetrieve network interface status and traffic statistics to monitor connectivity, diagnose link issues, and track data usage per interface on Keenetic routers.
Get network interfaces status and traffic stats
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.9.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the useful detail that results include traffic statistics, but does not describe output format or refresh behavior.
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 efficient sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded. No filler or redundancy.
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?
For a zero-parameter read-only tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could be slightly richer about what 'traffic stats' includes, but the safety and idempotency story is fully handled by annotations.
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?
No parameters exist, which is the baseline 4 case. The description adds scope meaning ('status and traffic stats') that indicates what the tool surfaces, though there is nothing further to document.
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 verb ('Get') and resource ('network interfaces') with the scope of data returned ('status and traffic stats'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_traffic or get_wifi. It does not name alternatives, but the resource is unambiguous.
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 versus the many other get_* siblings. There are no parameters, so there is no filtering condition to explain, but the description offers no context about when an agent should prefer this over get_traffic.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.