ensp_saveCampusConfigsByPortRange

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'save' implying mutation but does not specify if destructive, required permissions, or side effects. Minimal disclosure.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it omits critical information needed for effective use. Conciseness is not beneficial if it sacrifices clarity.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, and 0% param coverage. The description fails to explain what 'interactive save/y' means, the port range mechanism, or success/failure behavior. Inadequate for a tool with 2 parameters.

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 description coverage is 0%. Description does not explain parameters host and basePort beyond their names. 'Default port map' is vague and does not clarify how these params are used.

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 states the action 'send interactive save/y' and resource 'campus VRP devices', but 'interactive save/y' is jargon and unclear. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like ensp_applyCampusConfigsByPortRange or ensp_telnetExecute.

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 versus alternatives. No exclusions or context provided.

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