Add a port-in note

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

The description discloses error types (INVALID_PAYLOAD, FORBIDDEN, NOT_FOUND, INTERNAL_ERROR) and permission differences, adding behavioral context beyond the annotations (which only indicate non-read, non-destructive, non-idempotent). No contradiction with 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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, permissions/errors, and reading counterpart. No unnecessary words, well front-loaded.

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 three parameters all covered, and no output schema (mutation), the description is complete. It addresses usage, errors, and related tools, making it fully informative for an AI agent.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the default for visibility and the source for id, including cross-references to other tools. This enriches the schema definitions.

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 action: 'Add a note to the port request.' It uses a specific verb ('add') and resource ('note'), and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'port_list_notes' which reads notes.

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 explicit guidance on visibility: operator-only vs customer, and that customers get FORBIDDEN for 'internal'. It also mentions reading notes with port_list_notes. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool.

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