get_upnp_status

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds the scope of what is retrieved (status and mapping table) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, data freshness, or potential side effects.

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 concise sentence that immediately states the purpose. It contains no filler or redundant phrasing.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description sufficiently communicates what is retrieved. The presence of an output schema means the description does not need to detail return values.

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 schema covers all parameter information. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter explanation is needed.

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 verb '获取' (get) and the specific resource 'UPnP 当前状态和映射表' (UPnP current status and mapping table). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_upnp_settings by explicitly scoping to status and mappings.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_upnp_settings or list_port_mappings. The description relies entirely on the name to imply usage, providing no exclusions or context.

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