ndfc_get_switches

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly indicates a read operation ('Get list') and describes the return structure. However, it does not mention safety aspects like idempotency or rate limits, which are minor for a simple retrieval 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 concise with a clear docstring format (Args, Returns), front-loading the purpose. Every sentence is necessary and adds value with no wasted words.

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 tool with one parameter and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, what input is required, and what the output contains (including example fields). It is sufficiently complete for effective use.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description's 'Args' section explicitly explains the single parameter 'fabric_name' as 'Name of the fabric', adding complete meaning beyond the schema's minimal definition.

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 'Get list of switches in a specific fabric', specifying the verb, resource, and context. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'ndfc_get_all_switches' by explicitly mentioning the fabric filter.

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 switches from a specific fabric are needed but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool relative to alternatives like 'ndfc_get_all_switches'. It provides no exclusionary guidance.

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