apic_get_traffic_analysis

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explains return values (bytes averages, intervals) but omits side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only.

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?

Approximately 100 words with clear sections: purpose, args, returns, use case. No repetition or fluff. Front-loaded with main purpose.

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?

Describes parameters and return values adequately given no output schema, but lacks details on pagination, limits, or error handling. Acceptable for a simple query 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%, so description compensates by specifying that tenant is optional, epg requires tenant, and both are filters. Adds meaningful dependency info not present in 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?

Clearly states it analyzes network traffic for a tenant or EPG, using specific verbs and resource. Differentiates from siblings by focusing on traffic statistics rather than connectivity, health, or endpoint tracking.

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?

Only mentions 'Useful for traffic monitoring and troubleshooting' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like apic_get_top_talkers or apic_get_interface_statistics, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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