ciso_assistant_api_metrology_metric_instances_cascade_info_retrieveRetrieve cascade preview information for a metrology metric instance by ID to inspect dependent impacts before making changes.
Cascade preview:
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.3.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds essentially nothing beyond that: it does not say what a cascade preview returns, why it exists, or whether it is a dry-run of a delete.
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?
Brevity here is under-specification rather than conciseness; the single clause is truncated mid-thought with a dangling colon and no front-loaded purpose statement.
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?
A read endpoint with no output schema, an undocumented parameter, and a one-phrase description leaves the agent unable to know what it receives or why to call it. Nothing in the definition fills these gaps.
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?
One required parameter (id) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description supplies no clarification of what the id refers to or what object it identifies. The only reason this is not a 1 is that 'id' is a conventional identifier.
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?
"Cascade preview:" is a fragment ending in a colon, apparently truncated from a longer sentence. It hints at previewing cascade effects but never names the resource (metrology metric instances) or the verb, so an agent must infer purpose from the tool name alone.
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 whatsoever on when to use this versus siblings such as ..._retrieve, ..._object_retrieve, or the cascade_info tools on other resources. Nothing indicates when a cascade preview is warranted.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.