Policy Health Overview

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

The annotations already indicate a safe read operation (readOnlyHint=true), and the description adds value by clarifying the 'no_success_or_failure' bucket, explaining it is benign. No contradictions with 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?

The description is two concise sentences. The first states the purpose, the second explains a potentially confusing field. No wasted words.

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 description covers the tool's high-level purpose and one field. However, it lacks parameter details, which are important for correct invocation. With an output schema present, return values are handled, but parameter guidance is missing.

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 0%, and the description does not mention any of the 4 parameters (org_uuid, window_days, top_failures, max_runs) or their meaning. This is a critical gap for a tool with optional parameters.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Summarize recent Automox policy activity.' It also explains the meaning of a key field, distinguishing it from sibling policy tools like policy_detail or policy_compliance_stats.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. Siblings include many policy-related tools, but no comparative advice is given.

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