get_sensitive_data_scanner_config_standard_patterns

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers none. It doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only operation, whether it requires authentication, what format the patterns are returned in, whether there are rate limits, or any other behavioral characteristics. The single sentence provides no operational context beyond the basic action.

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 extremely concise ('Returns all standard patterns.') but this brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than efficient communication. While it's front-loaded with the core action, the single sentence fails to provide necessary context that would help an agent use the tool effectively.

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?

Given the complexity implied by the tool name (sensitive data scanner configuration patterns), the lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'standard patterns' are, what format they're returned in, whether there are limitations on what's returned, or how this fits into the broader sensitive data scanner configuration system.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the absence of parameters. The description doesn't need to add parameter information, and it appropriately doesn't mention any parameters. The baseline for 0 parameters with full schema coverage is 4, as the description doesn't mislead about 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 'Returns all standard patterns' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'get_sensitive_data_scanner_config_standard_patterns' without adding meaningful clarification. It doesn't specify what 'standard patterns' are, what resource they belong to (sensitive data scanner configuration), or how this differs from sibling tools like 'get_sensitive_data_scanner_configs' or 'create_sensitive_data_scanner_config_rules'.

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 provides absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools related to sensitive data scanner configuration (including get, create, update, and delete operations), there's no indication of when this specific 'standard patterns' retrieval is appropriate versus other configuration retrieval tools.

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