Api security advisories 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 covered elsewhere. The description adds almost nothing beyond the word "preview" — nothing about what the cascade payload contains, how deep the cascade goes, or whether it can fail if the id does not exist.

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?

Only two words plus a colon — this is under-specification rather than conciseness, and a dangling colon signals truncated text. Nothing is front-loaded because there is essentially no content.

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 cascade-preview endpoint with an undocumented id and no output schema needs the description to explain what is returned (affected objects, counts, blocked deletions). None of that is present, so the definition is not sufficient to call the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 0% and the sole parameter is an untyped, undescribed 'id'. The description does not say whether this is the advisory's primary key, its reference code, or an object UUID, leaving the caller to guess the identifier format.

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 largely restates the tool name rather than stating a verb and resource. It never says it previews the cascade effects (dependent objects) of deleting a specific security advisory, so the agent must infer everything from the endpoint slug.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of the alternative destroy/retrieve tools on the same resource, and no prerequisite or warning about how this preview relates to an actual delete. The trailing colon implies omitted content.

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