ports_search_field

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only and idempotent, and the description aligns with that. However, it does not add any additional behavioral context beyond what the annotations and schema already provide. With complete annotations, this is adequate.

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 that conveys the essential purpose without any extraneous information. It is concise and front-loaded, earning its place.

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?

Given the presence of sibling tools like 'ports_search' and 'ports_search_mac', the description lacks differentiation and usage context. The tool has 4 parameters and an output schema, yet the description does not guide the agent on when to use this specific search method.

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 already provides descriptions for all 4 parameters, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema states. Hence baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'search', resource 'ports', and the method 'by specific field'. It clearly identifies the tool's function, but lacks explicit differentiation from similar tools like 'ports_search' which might perform a broader search.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'ports_search' or 'ports_search_mac'. The description does not specify scenarios where field-specific search is preferable.

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