fetch_assets_summary

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, side effects, or data freshness. The return field descriptions are incorrect (e.g., 'status' described as 'Name of the asset'), which undermines transparency.

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 front-loaded with a clear first line but becomes verbose with a repetitive and incorrect Returns section. The field descriptions are all the same placeholder text 'Name of the asset.', wasting space and potentially confusing the agent.

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 single parameter and lack of structured output schema, the description attempts to document returns but does so with errors. It omits context like the nature of the summary, pagination, or filtering. The inaccuracies reduce completeness.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description explains the sole parameter 'id' as 'Assessment id', adding minimal semantic value beyond the schema. This is adequate for a simple string parameter.

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 'Get assets summary for given assessment id', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like fetch_checks_summary or fetch_resources_summary by focusing on assets summary.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention preconditions, typical use cases, or when not to use it.

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