Manage Bridge Port

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds idempotency detail ('add returns already_exists'), but does not elaborate on other behavioral aspects like permissions or side effects beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Description is two sentences with no extraneous information. First sentence states purpose, second provides key behavioral detail (idempotency). Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Despite annotations and schema, the description lacks explanation of return values, behavior of 'dryRun' and 'confirmationToken', and any error handling. For a mutation tool without an output schema, this incomplete context could confuse an 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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. Description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, noting the idempotent behavior of the 'add' action. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states 'Add or remove an interface from a bridge on a MikroTik router'. It specifies the verb (add/remove) and the resource (interface from a bridge), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'manage_bridge' which likely manage the bridge itself.

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?

Description implies usage context (adding/removing bridge ports) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. It provides clear context for its intended use.

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