Activate ported numbers

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

Discloses that activation is gated on activatability and lists errors (NOT_FOUND, CONFLICT, TNIQ_ERROR). Annotations show no read-only or destructive hint, so the description adds value with precondition and error details.

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 with three sentences that front-load the action, then cover prerequisites, alternatives, and errors. No unnecessary words.

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?

For a simple mutation tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: condition, prerequisite, alternative, and errors. It lacks details on success return but is generally adequate.

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 single parameter 'id' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description does not add further semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool activates numbers at the FOC stage of port-in, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling port_set_auto_activation, 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?

Provides explicit guidance: check port_get_progress first, use port_set_auto_activation for automatic activation, and mentions MFA requirement. This covers when and when not to use the tool.

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