ndfc_get_vrfs

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It mentions it returns a Dict with VRF names and configuration, which hints at read-only nature. However, it does not explicitly state non-destructive behavior or any side effects, which is acceptable for a simple GET operation.

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 and structured with Args/Returns sections. It is efficient but could benefit from slightly more detail, such as example values or expected input format.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally complete. It states what it returns but lacks details like error handling or pagination, which are not critical here but could be improved.

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 only parameter is fabric_name, which has no schema description. The description adds 'Name of the fabric', which is minimally informative and almost redundant given the parameter title. With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate more.

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 (Get list), the resource (VRFs), and the context (in a specific fabric). It distinguishes from sibling NDFC tools like ndfc_get_networks by specifying VRFs.

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 you need VRFs for a given fabric, but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives. For a simple retrieval, this is adequate but not exemplary.

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