get_fw_incoming_port_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral aspects. It mentions error codes but does not explain them or any side effects. The read-only nature is implied by the 'get_' prefix but not explicitly stated.

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 brief (two sentences plus error codes) but sacrifices useful details. While concise, it is too sparse to be fully helpful, earning a mid-range score.

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 tool's 1 parameter and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the output (though an output schema exists) or clarify the error codes. Context for usage is lacking.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must add meaning to the 'port_id' parameter. It does not explain its format, source, or how to obtain it, leaving the agent without sufficient guidance.

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 returns the requested IncomingPortConfig properties, using a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('IncomingPortConfig properties'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_fw_incoming' (likely lists all) and 'put_fw_incoming_port_id' (updates).

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 only lists error codes but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_fw_incoming' or 'put_fw_incoming_port_id'. There is no explicit context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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