asuswrt_guest_networks

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

The description indicates it is a read operation ('List'), but no annotations are provided. It does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or rate limits. Since it is a simple list, the description minimally meets expectations but adds no extra context.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the main action. It could be slightly more informative but is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but not fully complete. It does not clarify how this tool relates to similar sibling tools or what the output contains, leaving some ambiguity for the AI agent.

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?

There are no parameters defined, so baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable as the schema covers 100% of the empty parameter set.

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 clearly states 'List guest Wi-Fi networks and LAN-access state', specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like asuswrt_guest_wifi and asuswrt_guest_lan_access, which might have overlapping functionality.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to use it or when not to, and it does not reference sibling tools.

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