Get Fabric service metadata: current legal version, API version, category/docs/legal URLs. No authentication required. Call this before bootstrap to discover the service.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral value by stating 'No authentication required,' which is not captured in annotations. It also implies the returned metadata is needed before bootstrap, giving context beyond safety hints.
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, front-loaded with the action ('Get Fabric service metadata') and followed by essential context (no auth, before bootstrap). Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.
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?
This is a simple metadata fetch with no parameters and no output schema. The description covers purpose, the type of data returned, authentication requirements, and when to call it, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.
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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters since there are none. No additional parameter info is necessary.
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 clearly states the tool gets Fabric service metadata, listing specific content (legal version, API version, URLs). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fabric_get_categories and fabric_get_regions by covering general service metadata rather than a specific subset.
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 explicit usage guidance: 'Call this before bootstrap to discover the service.' This communicates when to use it. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for a simple metadata retrieval tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
All 7 tools have clearly distinct purposes: identity creation, metadata retrieval, category/region discovery, session management, and two-step recovery. No overlap.
Every tool follows the 'fabric_<verb>_<noun>' pattern with consistent snake_case. Verbs are descriptive (create, get, login, recovery_start, recovery_complete) making the convention predictable.
7 tools cover essential identity lifecycle steps (creation, session, recovery) and discovery (categories, regions, meta). This is well-scoped for the domain without bloat.
Core creation and discovery tools exist, but missing configuration updates (e.g., webhook URL, recovery key setup) and identity deletion. The recovery flow is complete, but post-creation setup must be done manually or via other means.