expose

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It explains the mechanism (creates a local listener via container exec) but does not detail side effects like port conflicts, reversibility (use unexpose), or security implications. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 and well-structured, with a one-line purpose statement, a brief mechanism explanation, and a clear Args section listing parameters. Every sentence adds value with no wasted 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (3 parameters, simple return value), the description is largely complete. It mentions the return type (connection URL or error). However, it lacks details on error scenarios or prerequisites (e.g., running sandbox). Slight gap but still effective.

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%, meaning the JSON schema provides no parameter descriptions. The tool's description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: port (required, integer), host_port (default same as port), and sandbox (default 'default'). This adds essential meaning beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose: 'Forward a sandbox port to localhost via TCP proxy.' It specifies the verb (forward), resource (sandbox port), and mechanism (TCP proxy via container exec). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'unexpose' which reverses the 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 explains when to use the tool (to expose a sandbox port locally) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The sibling 'unexpose' implies a complementary use, but no exclusions are given. Still, context is clear enough for most agents.

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