List Streams

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: "This is read-only and does not change NPM" declares the safety profile, and it names the return fields (IDs, ports, protocols, status). It omits auth requirements or pagination/result-size limits, which would matter for a list endpoint against a large config.

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 sentences, each earning its place: what it lists, when to use it, and what it returns / its safety profile. The most decision-relevant information (scope and the ID-lookup purpose) is 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?

For a parameterless read-only list tool this is complete: purpose, usage trigger, safety profile, and return contents are all covered, and an output schema exists so return values need no further elaboration in the description.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing parameter-related the description could add or omit; the 100% schema coverage is trivially satisfied by an empty object.

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 and resource ("List configured TCP/UDP streams") plus the scope detail "and their current status," which separates it cleanly from the single-item sibling get_stream. An agent can tell what it retrieves without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly says to use it "to find stream IDs before fetching, changing, enabling, disabling, or deleting a port forward," which routes the agent from this lookup tool to the downstream mutation siblings. It doesn't name any sibling tool directly (e.g. get_stream for a single stream), so it stops short of the full 5.

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