Api privacy data breaches cascade info retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds only 'Cascade preview:' and does not explain what is being previewed, what the response represents, or whether the preview has any side effects.

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 short, which would normally help conciseness, but here the brevity comes from missing content rather than efficient communication. It is an incomplete fragment, not a front-loaded summary.

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 retrieve endpoint with a required identifier and no output schema, the description should explain what a cascade preview returns and how it relates to the data breach resource. None of that is present, leaving the tool effectively undocumented.

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 requires one parameter, id, with 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not mention it. An agent gets no explanation of what the id identifies or what kind of identifier is expected.

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 is only the fragment 'Cascade preview:' and never states what resource is being previewed or what 'cascade info' contains. It gestures at the operation but does not give an agent enough to distinguish it from the many sibling cascade_info_retrieve tools.

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 use this tool, when to prefer it over the plain retrieve or list siblings, or what prerequisites are required. The description gives no usage context at all.

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