getSwitchPorts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Get' implies read-only and the description lists return fields, but it says nothing about pagination, error cases, authentication needs, or whether the result is ordered or paginated.

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?

A single, tight sentence that begins with the action and resource and immediately conveys the key identifier. No filler or redundant wording.

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?

Adequate for a simple getter: it names the resource, identifier, and main output fields. However, siteId remains unexplained, there is no mention of alternative tools, and non-success behavior or return shape is unspecified.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that switchMac is a MAC address, but it says nothing about the optional siteId parameter. Only partial semantic coverage for the parameters.

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?

States a specific verb, resource, and identifier: it gets all ports for a switch by MAC address. It also lists the returned attributes (status, profile, PoE, link speed, STP state), making it clearly distinct from sibling getters like getSwitch or getSwitchNetworks.

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 clear context: use when you need all ports for a specific switch identified by MAC. It says no alternative conditions or exclusions, so it stops short of giving explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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