sign_firewall_attestation

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry the burden. It does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or what 'emit signed attestation' entails (e.g., audit trail, storage).

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, no fluff, but under-specified. The description is concise but lacks detail on parameters and usage.

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?

With 8 parameters (6 required), no annotations, and an output schema not described, the description fails to cover essential context. It does not explain return value or parameter significance.

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%. Description does not explain any of the 8 parameters (e.g., tenant_id, window_start_utc). Agents have no information about what these fields represent.

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?

Description states specific purpose: emitting a signed attestation of firewall enforcement, and lists compliance standards it supports. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools which handle rules and scanning.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies use for compliance but does not specify prerequisites or exclusion conditions.

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