forcepoint_endpoint_inventory

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only,' disclosing that the operation is safe and non-mutating. It also clarifies that it returns data. However, it does not disclose return format or any access requirements beyond this, which is modest but adequate given the tool's simple nature.

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 consists of two concise sentences that are front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by a behavioral note. No filler or redundant 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 read-only tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It states what is returned (endpoint catalog and OpenAPI metadata) and that it is read-only. Given the simplicity, it does not require further detail, although a note on the response format would improve 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds some context by indicating the tool returns inventory metadata rather than accepting arguments.

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 uses the verb 'Return' and specifies the resource as 'documented Forcepoint endpoint catalog and generated OpenAPI inventory metadata,' making the purpose clear. It is distinct from sibling tools like forcepoint_api_request or forcepoint_connection_info, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention selection criteria, exclusions, or alternative tools. The only clue is 'Read-only,' which implies inspection use but is not explicit.

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