List port mappings

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by clarifying the scope ('across containers in an environment') and mentioning pagination, which are behavioral aspects beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 a single sentence of 12 words, front-loading the core purpose. Every word adds value with no redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 has 6 parameters with full schema descriptions and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, scope, and pagination. It lacks return structure hints, but for a list operation, the agent can infer the result is an array. Slightly incomplete for agents needing to know what fields are returned.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It mentions 'pagination' but the schema already describes start and limit parameters with defaults.

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 name and title clearly indicate listing port mappings. The description specifies the verb 'list', the resource 'port mappings', the scope 'across containers in an environment', and includes 'with pagination' for additional context. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling list tools by naming the specific resource and context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state when to avoid using it, mention prerequisites, or list related tools. Siblings include many list operations, but no differentiation criteria are given.

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