list_port_profiles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List' and describes parameter formats; it does not mention return format, pagination, ordering, or any read-only caveats beyond the verb itself.

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 two sentences with no wasted text. The purpose is front-loaded, and the parameter explanations are compact and useful.

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 tool, the parameter formats are covered, and the parenthetical 'speed, VLAN, PoE config' hints at the returned data. However, with no output schema, the description does not state the return shape, pagination, or ordering, leaving a modest gap.

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 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It does so well by defining host as 'console name, ID, or composite ID (MAC:numericId format)' and site as 'site name or ID'. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare string types.

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 ('List'), resource ('switch port profiles'), and scope ('for a site'), with example fields. It is clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_port_profile beyond the plural 'list'.

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?

The description gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it name alternatives like get_port_profile or update_port_profile. 'For a site' provides minimal context but no decision guidance.

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