alias_entries

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, and the '[READ]' tag largely repeats it. The description does add one genuinely useful behavioral detail: target should be omitted to fall back to the default target. It says nothing about return shape, entry format, or whether results are paginated, so it adds only modest context beyond the annotation.

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 one-line purpose followed by two tight parameter lines; the scope-defining content ('member entries of one alias') is front-loaded and nothing is padded.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description covers purpose, both parameters, and the default-target fallback. The one remaining gap is that it never hints at what an entry record contains beyond the hosts/networks/ports categories.

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 the burden and does so: it defines 'name' as an alias name sourced from list_aliases and defines 'target' as a firewall target name from config with the default-omission behavior. Only the exact expected string format of these values is left implicit.

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+resource: it returns the member entries (hosts/networks/ports) of a single alias, which is more specific than a bare 'get alias'. It is implicitly distinguished from list_aliases, add_alias_entry and remove_alias_entry by scoping to one alias's members, though no sibling is named as an explicit alternative.

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 '[READ]' prefix and the note that 'name' comes 'from list_aliases' imply the prerequisite lookup step, and 'target: omit for the default' tells the agent when to leave a parameter out. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance or comparison against add_alias_entry/remove_alias_entry.

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