getSwitchGeneralConfig

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes a read operation ('Get') with no mention of destructive actions, auth needs, rate limits, or side effects. This is minimally sufficient but could be more explicit.

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?

Two sentences cover purpose, scope, and a critical prerequisite. No wasted words; all content is essential and 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 high schema coverage (100%) and simple parameter structure (3 params, 1 required), the description adequately covers what the tool does and how to use it. Without an output schema, it provides enough context about the returned data.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying how to obtain the 'switchMac' parameter via listDevices, providing practical guidance beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), names the resource ('general configuration for a switch'), and enumerates included items (device name, LED settings, LLDP, flow control, other global parameters). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like getSwitchDetail, which focus on more specific aspects.

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 gives a direct prerequisite hint ('Use listDevices to get switchMac values'), implying when to use this tool (after listing devices). While it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, the context is clear from the sibling list.

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