Remove an existing simulation port by specifying its port number (1-999) to clean up the model or prepare for reconfiguration.
Delete a port by its port number.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| port_number | Yes | Port number to delete (1-999) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'delete a port' without disclosing behaviors like irreversibility, permissions needed, or error handling when port doesn't exist.
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?
One concise sentence with no wasted words. Efficiently communicates the core 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?
For a simple delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It could mention what happens if the port doesn't exist, but overall adequate.
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%, and the description mirrors the parameter's schema description without adding new semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate as no additional value is provided.
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 'Delete a port by its port number' clearly states the action (delete), resource (port), and method (by port number). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like cst_add_discrete_port.
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 (e.g., what if multiple ports share the number, or need to delete a range). No prerequisites or post-conditions mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.