ndfc_get_fabrics

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only states what the tool returns. It does not indicate that the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects, leaving important behavioral context unclear.

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 short, consisting of one sentence and a return note, but could be more efficient by avoiding repetition of 'Returns: Dict with...'. The purpose is sufficiently front-loaded, though some phrases are redundant.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should cover prerequisites (e.g., login) and scope (e.g., all fabrics). It lacks this context, making it incomplete for an agent to reliably invoke the 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?

The tool has no parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides (which is trivially 100% coverage). The description appropriately makes no false claims about parameters.

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 tool gets a list of fabric configurations and specifies the return includes fabric names, types, and status. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ndfc_get_fabric_summary, which likely returns a summary rather than full configurations.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ndfc_get_fabric_summary or other NDFC tools. The description does not mention prerequisites like prior authentication via ndfc_login, leaving the agent uncertain about setup requirements.

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