list_port_forwards

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' and phrase 'List all' make clear this is a read-only enumeration operation and implies completeness of the returned set. Still, it does not mention pagination, ordering, authorization requirements, or any special behavior beyond the basic listing.

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 short and front-loaded: the core action appears first, followed by terse parameter explanations. Every sentence serves a purpose, and there is no fluff. It could be slightly more structured, but it is appropriately concise.

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 two-parameter list operation with an output schema, the parameter formats are covered. However, the relationship between 'host' and 'site' is not explained, and there is no overarching context about when to use this tool. It is adequate but lacks the richness needed for an agent to fully understand the operation's role.

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%, so the description meaningfully compensates by defining host as 'console name, ID, or composite ID (MAC:numericId format)' and site as 'site name or ID.' This adds practical identifier format detail beyond the raw string type in the schema, though it does not explain preferred identifier resolution.

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 clear verb and resource: 'List all port forwarding rules for a site.' It is distinct from the sibling mutation tools (create/update/delete_port_forward). However, the main sentence mentions 'site' but not 'host', leaving slight ambiguity about whether the listing is scoped to a host or a site until reading the parameter notes.

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 alternatives. The description only explains parameter formats; it does not mention sibling tools like create_port_forward, update_port_forward, or delete_port_forward, nor does it provide any when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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