list_ports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral responsibility. It only says 'List' which implies a read-only snapshot, but it does not disclose whether the operation is guaranteed to be non-mutating, whether it may require specific system permissions, or what happens if no ports are found. This leaves the behavioral profile under-specified.

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?

Exactly one sentence, front-loaded with the actionable verb, and includes a short parenthetical with concrete examples. No wasted words or redundant detail.

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?

The tool is very simple (no inputs, no documented output schema), so the description conveys the core purpose. However, it doesn't explicitly state the return format (e.g., list of port names strings) or any error conditions, leaving minor but relevant gaps.

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 the description needs no parameter information. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and there is no parameter-related gap to address.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'serial ports detected by arduino-cli', with examples of port types. It is unambiguous and distinguishable from siblings like board_list or core_list, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with any alternative tool.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention scenarios where listing ports is appropriate (e.g., before upload) or any prerequisites. The agent is left to infer context from the description alone.

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