getSwitchDetail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The tool reads data without modification, but the description does not explicitly state it is read-only nor mention any behavioral quirks like rate limits or permissions. The 'Fetch' verb implies safety, but transparency could be improved.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first covers purpose and scope, the second provides a critical prerequisite. No redundant information, every word earns its place.

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 the complexity of the tool (detailed switch data) and the absence of an output schema, the description lists the fields returned (model, firmware, CPU/memory, port states, etc.), which is highly informative. It also notes the prerequisite and optional siteId. This is sufficient for an agent to understand 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 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds value by linking switchMac to listDevices and siteId to listSites with a default behavior note. This context aids correct parameter usage beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and clearly enumerates the resources retrieved (model, firmware, CPU/memory, port states, PoE usage, VLAN config, STP status). It distinguishes from sibling tools like getSwitchGeneralConfig and getApDetail by stating it retrieves full configuration and status.

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 explicitly instructs to use listDevices to obtain the switchMac parameter, providing a clear prerequisite. While it doesn't contrast with alternative switch detail tools, the guidance is sufficient for correct invocation.

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