get_switches

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

Despite no annotations, the description implies a safe read operation, but lacks details on potential failures (e.g., no connected switches) or rate limits. The transparency is adequate for a simple list tool but not thorough.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no superfluous information, perfectly sized for the simplicity of the tool.

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?

The description lacks return value details (e.g., structure of each switch), which is notable since there is no output schema. However, the tool's simplicity and zero parameters mitigate the gap somewhat.

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?

With zero parameters and schema coverage at 100%, the description adds no parameter details but none are needed. The baseline of 4 applies per guidelines.

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 a list') and the resource ('all connected OpenFlow switches'), differentiating it from sibling tools like get_flow_stats or get_switch_desc.

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 when detailed switch descriptions are needed via get_switch_desc.

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