cst_schematic_create_external_port

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

With no annotations, the description partially explains behavior by mentioning two modes (connected calls directly, offline returns VBA). However, it lacks details on side effects, prerequisites, or the nature of the VBA script.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no superfluous information, and is front-loaded with the main action.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or how the VBA output is used. For a tool with 6 parameters, more context is needed.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes parameters. The description adds no extra semantic meaning or usage hints for parameters like impedance or label.

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 creates a schematic external port and distinguishes between connected and offline modes. The name is specific, and while no explicit sibling differentiation is given, the tool's purpose is clear.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like cst_add_waveguide_port. The description does not provide context for selecting this port type over other port-related tools.

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