Api threats 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 safety is covered. The word "preview" adds a small hint that the result is informational rather than applied, but the description says nothing about what a cascade is in this domain, what is returned, or whether the id must reference an existing threat.

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 followed by a colon are not padded, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness; the fragment is not even a complete sentence and carries no front-loaded actionable information.

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 tool whose only structured context is an untyped `id` and safety annotations, the description should explain the cascade preview semantics and the expected identifier. It supplies none of that, leaving the agent unable to judge inputs or outputs.

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 does not say what kind of id it is (threat, object, or generic record) or what happens if it is invalid. With no compensating text, the parameter is entirely undocumented.

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 mostly restates the tool name's "cascade info" wording; it never says what is previewed, what object the cascade applies to, or what the response contains. It is distinguishable from list/create/update siblings only by the name itself, not by the description.

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 the dozen-plus sibling tools, no mention of prerequisites such as needing an existing threat id, and no note that this is a preview (read-only) versus an applied action.

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