getCableTestFullResults

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states what data is returned but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, requires special permissions, or has any side effects, leaving a significant gap for a tool with no safety annotations.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loads the verb and resource, includes a sibling comparison, and contains no superfluous information.

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 the absence of an output schema, the description offers a reasonable overview of return fields (cable status, length, fault location) and implies an array structure per port, which is sufficient for an agent to understand the nature of the output, though full completeness would require more structural detail.

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?

The input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The description does not add extra meaning or usage details beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 it retrieves full cable test results for all ports on a switch, and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool getCableTestLogs by noting it provides more detailed data including cable status, length, and fault location.

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 explains when to use the tool (for detailed per-port diagnostics) and compares it to getCableTestLogs as a less detailed alternative, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention other alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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