panelica_antivirus_get_v1_antivirus_quarantine

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context like "Required scopes: security:read" and the explicit HTTP endpoint, but it does not describe what the returned quarantine list contains or any pagination/ordering 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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core action "List quarantine", followed by structured metadata. Minor redundancy exists since "Read-only" repeats the readOnlyHint annotation, but overall the size is appropriate for a zero-parameter GET endpoint.

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, zero-parameter, read-only list operation with strong annotations, the description is mostly complete: it specifies the endpoint, method, required scope, and read-only nature. The absence of return-value details is a minor gap given no output schema exists, but "List quarantine" plus the endpoint make the tool's purpose sufficiently clear.

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 there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. The schema fully defines the call signature, and no additional parameter explanation is needed.

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 starts with "List quarantine", a clear verb+resource statement that identifies the tool as a read-only retrieval of antivirus quarantine entries. It is distinct from sibling tools like panelica_antivirus_get_v1_antivirus_status or panelica_antivirus_post_v1_antivirus_scan, though it does not explicitly name those 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 the HTTP method, category, required scopes, and read-only nature, but gives no guidance about when to choose this tool over other antivirus-related tools. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusion criteria, so the agent must infer usage context from the tool name alone.

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