listSwitchNetworks

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the output in general terms but does not disclose potential side effects, error cases, pagination behavior (though page/pageSize are in schema), or any guarantees about data freshness. This is adequate but not detailed.

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 sentences with zero wasted words. The first sentence states purpose and output, the second provides essential prerequisite guidance. Front-loaded, efficient, and easy to parse.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description should explain the return value structure. It only says 'Returns which VLANs are assigned to which ports', which is vague. Combined with 5 parameters and no further details on output format, completeness is moderate.

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%, with each parameter described. The description adds a cross-reference for switchMac ('Use listDevices to get switchMac values') but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('VLAN network assignments for a switch'), and specifies the output ('which VLANs are assigned to which ports, including tagged and untagged configurations'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like listDevices or getSwitchDetail.

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?

It provides explicit guidance on a prerequisite ('Use listDevices to get switchMac values') and implies the tool is for network assignments. However, it does not list alternatives or state when not to use this tool (e.g., to list all network assignments across switches), which would strengthen the score.

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