listSwitchNetworks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or has any side effects. The pagination parameters (page, pageSize) imply paginated results but the description omits this behavior. Basic behavioral disclosure is minimal.

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 plus a brief note. No redundant information, front-loaded with main purpose. Every word earns its place.

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 tool has no output schema, so the description must cover return format and pagination. It briefly describes output (which VLANs assigned to ports) but does not mention pagination behavior or result structure. Given 5 parameters and common list tool patterns, the description is adequate but misses key details.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the context for switchMac (use listDevices) and siteId default behavior. It also clarifies the output briefly. However, some parameter descriptions (page, pageSize) add little 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 clearly states the tool lists VLAN network assignments for a switch, specifying output includes VLAN ports with tagged/untagged configuration. It mentions a prerequisite step (use listDevices to get switchMac). No sibling tool explicitly covers switch VLAN assignments, so it is well-distinguished.

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 provides a clear usage context: to retrieve VLAN assignments for a switch. It explicitly tells the user to use listDevices to obtain the switchMac parameter. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or contrast with similar tools like getSwitchDetail or getSwitchGeneralConfig, leaving some ambiguity.

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