get_fabric_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It communicates a read-only intent through 'Get' and states the output shape, but it does not disclose behaviors such as project-state requirements, ordering guarantees, or whether any implicit filtering occurs. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single sentence that is immediately informative, with the action, scope, and output contents all front-loaded. There is no redundant wording or filler.

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 zero-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description adequately specifies scope and return contents. It could be slightly more explicit about the exact return structure, but an agent can confidently invoke it without missing critical information.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds meaningful context by stating the scope ('current project') and the returned data ('indices and names'), which is all an agent needs given no inputs are required.

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') and resource ('a list of all fabrics in the current project'), and clarifies the return contents ('indices and names'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_fabric_info, which targets a single fabric, and get_fabric_for_pattern, which is scoped to a pattern.

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 get_fabric_info or get_fabric_for_pattern. The intended use is implied by the name and description, but there are no explicit exclusions or alternative-routing hints.

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