apic_get_bridge_domain_multicast_by_tenant

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool retrieves multicast information and returns GIPo addresses, but it does not disclose permissions, idempotency, or potential side effects. The behavior is adequately described for a simple read operation, but lacks depth.

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 concise with a clear title line, an Args list, and a Returns note. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easily parseable by an AI agent.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is largely sufficient. It explains what the tool does, its input, and what it returns. However, the lack of annotations and minimal behavioral details leave minor gaps.

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?

The schema has 0% coverage (no parameter descriptions), but the description's Args section adds meaning: 'tenant: Tenant name to filter bridge domains'. This clarifies the parameter's role beyond the schema, though it doesn't specify format or constraints.

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 action ('Retrieve') and the resource ('multicast information for bridge domains') with a specific scope ('of a specific tenant'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'apic_get_bridge_domains_multicast' which likely returns all bridge domains without tenant filtering.

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 use for a specific tenant but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'apic_get_bridge_domains_multicast'. No exclusions or contextual guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name.

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