get_vlan_membership

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, but 'Get' plus the enumerated per-port states makes the read-only nature and returned content fairly clear. It does not disclose permission requirements, whether the VLAN must already exist, or behavior when vlan_id is omitted (schema default 1) — modest gaps for a simple getter.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence naming the verb, the protocol scope, and the returned categories. Nothing wasted, no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not required, and the description correctly focuses on scope and content. For a one-parameter read tool this is nearly sufficient; only the absence of any when-to-use guidance and of parameter/dependency detail keeps it short of complete.

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 0% for the single vlan_id parameter, and the description only implies it via 'for a VLAN'. It communicates that membership is scoped to one VLAN but adds no format, range, or default behavior beyond what the schema's bare 'Vlan Id' title offers.

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+resource ('Get 802.1Q VLAN port membership for a VLAN') and enumerates the membership categories returned (tagged/untagged/forbidden/excluded). It is clearly distinguishable from the write sibling set_port_vlan_membership, though it does not explicitly contrast with list_vlans.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives. The obvious pairing with set_port_vlan_membership (read before write) is left for the agent to infer, and there is no mention of prerequisites or required context beyond the implicit VLAN scoping.

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