Symantec ZTNA AIops

ztna_collections

Read-only

List site collections with pagination and text filtering to locate and review collections in a Symantec ZTNA tenant.

Instructions

[READ] List site collections.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ztna_collections"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No
`limit`	No
`filter_text`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is a safe read, and "[READ]" repeats that without adding anything. The description says nothing about pagination behavior, default page size, how filter_text matches, or what a result entry contains, so beyond the annotation it contributes almost no behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, but its brevity comes from under-specification rather than efficiency. There is no wasted wording, yet the description is too thin to be genuinely well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter listing tool with no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the definition leaves the agent without paging, filtering, or return-shape information. Given the dense set of similarly named sibling tools, more context is needed to call this correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so all three parameters (page, limit, filter_text) are documented only by their bare names. The description does not compensate by explaining paging semantics, allowed limit ranges, or which fields filter_text searches.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a verb and resource ("List site collections"), which is enough to know it enumerates collections. However, with siblings ztna_collection, ztna_site_collections, and ztna_shared_objects present, it does not clarify whether this returns collections belonging to a site or all collections, so an agent cannot fully distinguish scope from the siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to any alternative tool such as ztna_collection or ztna_site_collections. The only hint is the "[READ]" prefix, which merely restates that it is a read operation.

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