panorama_get_log_collectors

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, and the description reinforces safety with '[READ-ONLY]'. It adds useful behavioral transparency by revealing the exact CLI command executed ('show log-collector all'), which is beyond what the annotations provide. It does not cover error cases or prerequisites, but for a simple read operation this is sufficient.

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 with no fluff. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the exact command is placed second, giving the agent the essential information in minimal space.

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 read-only, zero-required-parameter tool with annotations covering safety and a schema covering the optional parameter, the description is complete. The exact command and the object being retrieved are enough for correct invocation; no output schema is present, but the description's 'configuration and status' adequately frames the expected result.

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 already has 100% description coverage, including when the 'firewall' parameter is required and its source ('from firewalls.json'). The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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: 'Retrieves log collector configuration and status from Panorama.' It also names the exact underlying command ('show log-collector all'), making the tool's function unambiguous and distinguishable from sibling tools like panorama_get_collector_groups.

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 when to use the tool (when log collector configuration or status is needed) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. It provides no routing guidance relative to the many panorama_* sibling tools.

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