panelica_antivirus_get_v1_antivirus_quarantine

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

Given no annotations, the description effectively conveys the read-only nature via HTTP GET, pagination, filtering, and scope restrictions (admin vs non-admin). It lacks details on rate limits or error handling, but covers key behavioral traits.

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 is extremely concise (three lines) with no wasted words. It front-loads the main purpose and includes essential details like filtering and permissions, plus HTTP method and category.

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 simple GET endpoint with no output schema, the description covers purpose, filtering, and permissions. Missing response structure details, but sufficient for basic tool selection and invocation.

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 100% but descriptions are minimal. The tool description adds value by listing valid status values (active, restored, deleted) for the status parameter, enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool returns a paginated list of quarantined files with threat details, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling antivirus tools which handle scans and status, not quarantined files.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The permission scoping for non-admin users provides some context, but no comparative usage advice is given.

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