listSitesCableTestSwitchesIncrementResults

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

Annotations already declare this is a read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds only the ambiguous term 'incremental' without explaining what incremental means, whether it returns a delta or paginated data, or any rate-limit/auth context.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the operation, though the brevity leaves gaps handled elsewhere.

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 low-complexity two-parameter read tool, the schema and annotations cover most invocation needs. However, the description never clarifies the relationship to full-results siblings or what 'incremental' returns, leaving a meaningful gap for an agent choosing among cable-test tools.

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 100%, so switchMac and siteId are fully documented in the schema, including cross-references to listDevices and listSites. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable at baseline 3.

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 a specific verb and resource: get cable test incremental results for a switch. It distinguishes the result type as 'incremental,' but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like getCableTestFullResults or getCableTestLogs.

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 getCableTestFullResults or getCableTestLogs. It also omits any prerequisites or conditions for requesting incremental rather than full results.

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