list_wlan_groups

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List WLAN groups' and defines parameters; it does not mention read-only behavior, pagination, output shape, failure conditions, or permissions needed.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by two concise parameter clarifications. No filler exists, though it could be slightly better structured by explicitly labeling the parameter lines as a definition block.

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 simple list operation with two required string parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation details. It lacks sibling differentiation and any return-value or behavior notes, but it is adequate for a minimal list tool.

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 must compensate for the bare string-typed schema. It does so by clarifying that host accepts a console name, ID, or composite ID (MAC:numericId format), and site accepts a name or ID, which is valuable disambiguation.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List WLAN groups for a site'), making the tool's core purpose clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar siblings like list_wlan_configs or get_wlan_group, so it stops short of a 5.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_wlan_configs or get_wlan_group. The description explains what the parameters are but does not state under what circumstances an agent should select this tool.

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