set_web_ports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It simply states 'set' without explaining effects such as whether existing sessions are disrupted, whether the change requires a reboot, or how force_https affects the ports. This is a critical gap for a mutating operation.

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?

Although brief, the description is under-specified and merely repeats the tool name. It fails to provide any additional context, making it an unjustified one-liner rather than a concise informative summary.

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 tool that modifies ports and has an output schema, this description is far too sparse. It omits the purpose of the ports, the implications of force_https, and any potential side effects, leaving an agent without sufficient information to decide whether and how to invoke it.

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 input schema thoroughly describes all three parameters (http_port, https_port, force_https) with defaults and descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-level information, so the schema's documentation carries the full weight.

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 '设置 Web 管理端口' is a direct translation of the tool name 'set_web_ports', adding only the word 'management'. It restates the name without clarifying what the web ports control (e.g., the router's admin interface), making it essentially a tautology.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description neither mentions conditions for use nor distinguishes it from similar setter tools like set_dns_config or set_snmp.

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