asuswrt_lan_details

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. 'Inspect' indicates a read-only operation. However, it does not mention potential side effects, permissions, or limitations. The description is minimal but not misleading for a simple inspection tool.

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, front-loaded sentence. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no fluff.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but vague. It specifies 'addressing' and 'DHCP presence' but could more clearly indicate what data is returned (e.g., IP, subnet mask, DHCP status).

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 zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter-specific information.

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 'Inspect LAN interface, addressing, and DHCP presence.' It uses a specific verb ('Inspect') and identifies the resources (LAN interface, addressing, DHCP presence). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like asuswrt_wan_details (WAN) and asuswrt_dhcp_config (configuration).

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 implies usage for inspecting LAN details but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are provided.

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