nexus_troubleshoot_switch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly states 'This is read-only,' which is a critical safety trait. It also lists the data categories collected, giving a clear picture of the operation's scope, though it does not mention potential performance impact or output format.

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 action and scope are front-loaded, the list of contents is compact, and the read-only note is a single clause. There is zero wasted language.

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?

For a simple two-parameter read-only tool, the description is largely complete: it explains the operation, lists what is collected, and states safety. The lack of explicit return format or parameter details prevents a perfect score, but the listed bundle contents provide adequate context for a troubleshooting tool.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions), and the description does not explicitly explain what 'fabric_name' or 'switch_id' mean. It implies 'switch_id' identifies the switch through 'for one switch,' but 'fabric_name' is never connected to the bundle. The description adds little meaning 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 ('Collect') and resource ('troubleshooting bundle for one switch'), and explicitly lists what the bundle contains. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like nexus_read (generic read) or nexus_apply_change (mutation).

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 phrase 'focused troubleshooting bundle' clearly implies when to use this tool (during troubleshooting). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context makes the use case obvious relative to the change-management siblings.

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