iaas_get_fabric_network

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the raw endpoint path and no further behavioral context such as not-found behavior or response shape, so it sits at the minimum-viable level given rich annotations.

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?

Three very short lines with the purpose front-loaded and no filler prose. It is slightly redundant, repeating 'Get fabric network' twice, but the total length is negligible.

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 single-resource GET with full schema coverage, comprehensive annotations, and no output schema, this is adequate but thin. It never explains what a fabric network represents or when an agent would reach for it rather than the vSphere-specific or plural variants among the many siblings.

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 100%, so id, select, and apiVersion are already documented in the schema. The description mentions only the 'given id' and adds nothing about select's filtering semantics or the apiVersion date format, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get fabric network') and adds 'with a given id', which signals single-resource retrieval. That implicitly separates it from the plural sibling iaas_get_fabric_networks, but no sibling is named explicitly, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. the id must come from iaas_get_fabric_networks or a related listing call), and no named alternative. The only hint is the phrase 'with a given id', which merely restates the required parameter already documented in the schema.

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