Api risk assessments risk analytics retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no further behavioral context such as what analytics are computed, permissions needed, or response shape.

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 definition is a single short sentence with no wasted words and is front-loaded. Its brevity is efficient, though it borders on under-specification rather than maximal helpfulness.

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, the description should explain what 'analytics data' contains, but it does not. Combined with no usage guidance relative to sibling retrieve/export tools, it leaves important context missing for an agent choosing and calling it.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single required 'id' parameter. The description only implies that 'id' identifies a risk assessment via 'single risk assessment'; it does not add format, constraints, or explicit parameter meaning.

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 identifies a resource ('single risk assessment') and a data category ('Analytics data'), but 'analytics data' is vague and does not specify what kind of analytics are returned. It is distinguishable from the plain risk-assessment retrieve sibling only by the word 'analytics', which is weak differentiation.

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 instead of ciso_assistant_api_risk_assessments_retrieve or the many other risk-assessment analytics/export endpoints. The intended context is only implied by 'analytics data'.

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