apic_search_by_ip

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states that the tool returns 'matching endpoints and subnets' and performs a 'comprehensive search across the fabric', which implies read-only behavior and broad scope. However, it does not disclose auth requirements or rate limits, which is acceptable for a simple search tool.

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 extremely concise, using three short sentences to convey purpose, parameter, and return value. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words, and the purpose is front-loaded.

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 adequately covers the return value and behavior. It lacks detail on error conditions or pagination, but for a straightforward search, it is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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 provides no description for the single parameter (ip_address), but the description in the Args section states 'IP address to search', adding semantic meaning beyond the type definition. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Search', resource 'APIC objects', and scope 'by IP address'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like apic_analyze_connectivity or apic_get_epg_endpoints by specifying a unique input (IP address) and output (endpoints and subnets).

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 usage when needing to find APIC objects by IP address, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. The purpose is clear enough for basic selection, but lacks direct guidance.

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