getSwitchStackDetail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the function without mentioning read-only nature, required permissions, or side effects. The minimal description fails to inform an AI agent about safe usage.

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, direct sentence with no extraneous information. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 three parameters (one with no description), no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is too brief. It does not specify what 'detailed information' includes, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's output.

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 67%, with siteId and customHeaders having descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; stackId lacks a description. Baseline is 3 due to moderate coverage, but no additional semantic value.

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 it fetches detailed information for a specific switch stack, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like getStackPorts and getStackNetworkList by specifying it retrieves 'detailed information' rather than ports or networks.

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 implies usage for getting stack details but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use getStackPorts or getStackNetworkList instead.

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