roboshadow_get_ransomware_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation and 'every device' clarifies scope, but the description does not address output format, pagination behavior, permissions, or whether the report is limited in any way.

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 a single well-formed sentence with no filler or repetition. It states the action, the resource, and the scope immediately, which makes it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

The schema covers all inputs, including how to discover organisationId, and the description conveys the core output concept: ransomware-protection status per device. However, there is no output schema and the description does not explain what values or fields the status report will contain, leaving the response shape somewhat underspecified.

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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter already has a clear meaning: organisationId is the org UUID discoverable via list_organisations, and page/itemsPerPage handle pagination. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List ransomware-protection status for every device in the organisation.' This clearly communicates what the tool does and scopes it to all devices. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling report tools, but no sibling has the same ransomware focus.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as roboshadow_get_antivirus_report_by_device or roboshadow_get_firewall_report. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where another report would be more appropriate.

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