Get Front_port

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the return format (Markdown by default, JSON optional) and notes that JSON returns the full object with nested references. This provides useful behavioral context beyond 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: three sentences with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and follows with usage guidance and return format details. Every sentence adds value.

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 (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage context, and return format. The annotations and schema already provide structural details, so the description is complete for agent decision-making.

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 100% coverage, so both parameters ('id' and 'response_format') are fully described. The description adds contextual guidance for 'response_format', explaining when to use JSON for chaining, which improves usability.

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 states exactly what the tool does: 'Get a single front_port from NetBox by numeric id.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the context signals (sibling tools like netbox_list_front_ports, netbox_create_front_port) distinguish this as a retrieval operation.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: 'Use after netbox_list_front_ports has located the object, or when you already have the id.' It also provides guidance on the response_format parameter, recommending 'json' for chaining tool calls.

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