get_switch_port_id_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It lists possible error codes (bad_port, bad_speed, etc.), which adds some transparency about failure modes. However, it does not state that the tool is read-only or describe any side effects.

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: one sentence for purpose, one line for error codes. No unnecessary words or repetition. Front-loads the key action.

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 simplicity (single parameter, output schema present), the description is adequate but could be more helpful. It describes what the tool does and lists error codes, but lacks context about the nature of stats (e.g., current vs. historical) or typical use cases.

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 has 0% description coverage for the 'id' parameter. The description clarifies that it is 'the given port id', adding minimal but necessary context. No format or constraints are specified, so it partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 'Get' and the resource 'SwitchPortStats for the given port id'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_switch_port_id' by specifying 'stats', making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No explicit usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_switch_port_id) or mention prerequisites. Error codes hint at potential issues but do not guide selection.

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