Api risk scenarios export csv 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 covered elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond that and its phrase 'viewed or edited' misleadingly implies a write capability the read-only export endpoint does not have; it also omits anything about output format, file size, or streaming behavior.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no waste, but that brevity comes from being boilerplate rather than from being economical. The one thing an agent needs, the CSV export action, is missing entirely.

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 generic annotations, the description carries the full burden of saying what comes back, and it says nothing about CSV contents, columns, or scope. For a data-export tool in a large sibling family, this leaves an agent unable to invoke it confidently.

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 takes zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to add. Baseline of 4 applies; the only missed opportunity is noting that the export covers all risk scenarios rather than a filtered subset.

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 generic boilerplate: 'allows risk scenarios to be viewed or edited' names the resource but never states the actual operation, which per the tool name is a CSV export. An agent reading only the description cannot tell this apart from retrieve, list, or update siblings on risk scenarios.

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 on when to use this versus the many siblings (e.g. ciso_assistant_api_risk_scenarios_export_xlsx_retrieve, _retrieve, _list). No mention of what the export covers, whether it respects filters, or when a CSV is preferable to XLSX.

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