setSwitchPortProfileOverride

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

Annotations include destructiveHint=true, which already alerts the agent to the mutating nature. The description adds the scope detail but does not disclose consequences, reversibility, or effects on the port's existing configuration. It does not contradict the annotation, so a mid-score is appropriate.

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 with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the action and resource and conveys the core scope efficiently.

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?

Although the tool is simple, the description omits important context: what 'profile override' means, how siteId relates, prerequisites for calling this tool, and when to prefer it over closely related siblings. With low schema coverage and no output schema, this is a meaningful gap.

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 only 25%, and the only documented parameter, profileOverrideEnable, simply restates the tool description. The description does not add meaning for switchMac, port, or siteId, leaving the agent with minimal semantic guidance for three of four 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?

The description uses a specific verb pair ('Enable or disable') with a clear resource ('profile override') and scope ('single switch port'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like setSwitchPortProfile and the batchSetSwitchPort* tools by explicitly stating 'single' and using 'override' rather than generic profile assignment.

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 gives no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as setSwitchPortProfile or batchSetSwitchPortProfile. There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions; only the word 'single' implies a scope distinction.

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