Api policies cascade info retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds only the word "preview", implying a dry-run style response, but says nothing about what the preview contains, what is affected by the cascade, or what permissions are needed.

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 words plus a colon is not conciseness but under-specification; there is no front-loaded sentence explaining the operation. Nothing is wasted, but very little is said.

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?

For a read-only preview endpoint with one undocumented parameter and no output schema, the description is far too thin: the agent cannot tell what it will get back or whether calling it has any side effects on dependent objects.

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 single required parameter "id" has 0% schema description coverage and the description supplies nothing: it never states which object type the id refers to (assumed policy) or what the id's format is. The description does not compensate for the documentation gap at all.

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 that only restates the name/title (cascade info retrieve). It hints at a preview of cascade effects for policies, but names no verb-resource relationship the agent could act on and does nothing to separate it from the dozens of other *_cascade_info_retrieve 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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus ciso_assistant_api_policies_retrieve, policies_impact_graph_retrieve, or the many other cascade_info tools. A two-word fragment leaves the agent to guess entirely from the tool name.

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