Get Vlan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds the behavior regarding return format (Markdown vs JSON) and mentions that JSON includes nested references. However, it does not disclose other behavioral aspects like pagination or error conditions. Given that annotations cover safety, this is adequate.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The description provides clear purpose, usage, and parameter guidance. Without an output schema, it mentions the return format (Markdown or JSON with nested references). It could be slightly more detailed about the fields returned, but for a retrieval tool with strong annotations, it is mostly complete.

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 the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds a slight usage hint for response_format ('Use json when chaining follow-up tool calls'), but does not add meaning beyond the schema's descriptions. Baseline 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'vlan', specifying retrieval by numeric id. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'netbox_list_vlans' by indicating it should be used after locating the object via that tool.

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 states when to use the tool: 'Use after netbox_list_vlans has located the object, or when you already have the id.' It also explains the purpose of the response_format parameter. While it doesn't list explicit exclusions, the context is clear enough for an agent.

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