zte_modify_port_forward

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description does not elaborate on behavioral traits beyond stating that it modifies a rule. No mention of side effects, authentication needs, or what happens on failure. The description adds minimal value over 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 concise, uses a clear structure with a purpose statement followed by a parameter list. Every sentence provides value, no unnecessary content.

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 high parameter count, the description sufficiently explains each parameter and the tool's purpose. An output schema exists, so return values are not required. Lacks details on constraints (e.g., index must exist) but overall complete for selection and invocation.

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?

Schema has 0% description coverage; the description provides clear definitions for all 8 parameters, including that 'index' is obtained from another tool and protocol values. This significantly aids proper invocation.

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 explicitly states 'Modifica una regla de port forwarding existente' (modifies an existing port forwarding rule), which is a specific verb+resource. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'add' and 'delete'.

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 purpose is clear from the tool name and description, implying usage for modifying existing rules rather than adding or deleting. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor mention of prerequisites or constraints.

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