Api incidents severity retrieve

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

The description claims export-file behavior, but nothing in it tells the agent this is a read-only retrieval of an enum/choice list. Rather than adding context beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/idempotentHint annotations, it suggests a different return shape (a CSV/XLSX file) than what the retrieve endpoint produces.

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?

A single short sentence with no padding, so structurally it is tight. Brevity does not compensate for the fact that the one sentence is the wrong content.

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 no output schema, no parameters, and a name that reveals little beyond 'retrieve', the description is the only place to explain what the endpoint returns. It gives the agent nothing usable and instead mischaracterizes the resource entirely.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline would normally be 4, but the description implies a format choice (CSV vs XLSX) that does not exist among the parameters. That manufactures a nonexistent parameter and could lead the agent to look for or attempt to pass an export-format argument.

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?

"Generic export mixin for CSV/XLSX exports" describes a code-level base class, not this endpoint. The name and title indicate retrieving incident severity options, so the description is actively misleading about what the tool does and cannot distinguish it from any of the many incident siblings.

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 indication of when to call this versus ciso_assistant_api_incidents_severity_breakdown_retrieve, ciso_assistant_api_incidents_export_csv_retrieve, or ciso_assistant_api_incidents_export_xlsx_retrieve. The text points toward exports, which would route the agent to the wrong siblings.

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