Identify available serial communication ports on your host system. This enables the serial terminal to locate necessary hardware for log reading and command execution.
List the serial ports on this computer.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'List' implies a safe, non-mutating read, and 'on this computer' usefully scopes it to local ports, but it says nothing about the return shape (port names, identifiers, empty result) or whether enumeration has side effects.
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?
One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero filler. Nothing is padded or buried.
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 zero-parameter discovery tool this is nearly adequate, but with no output schema the description should hint at what the listing contains so an agent knows it can feed the results into connect_serial. That missing link to the workflow is the main completeness 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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain; baseline 4 applies. No misleading or missing parameter information.
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?
States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('serial ports'), which clearly distinguishes it from the connection/IO siblings like connect_serial and read_received_data. It could be sharper about scope (local machine only, enumerated device names), but the core purpose is unambiguous.
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?
Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the discovery step before connect_serial, but the description never says so explicitly and offers no exclusions or alternatives. Minimum viable guidance for a trivial discovery tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.