switch_show_vlans

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It indicates a read-only 'show' operation but adds no additional context such as required permissions, output size, or potential latency. It essentially repeats the tool name's implication without deeper transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information. Every word contributes to meaning, making it extremely concise and well-structured.

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 is simple with one parameter and no output schema, but the description is minimal. It does not explain what the output looks like, whether it includes all VLANs or only configured ones, or any platform specifics. While adequate for a basic read tool, it leaves some gaps given the lack of an output schema.

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 covers 100% of the parameter (device_id with description 'Switch device ID'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond that, not explaining how the device ID is used or any format requirements.

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 the specific verb 'Show' with the resource 'VLAN configuration' on a switch, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like switch_show_interfaces or switch_show_mac_table. It precisely states what the tool does without ambiguity.

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 VLAN configuration is needed, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. There is no mention of when not to use it or how it differs from other show commands.

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