zabbix_script_get

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It says nothing about read-only nature, permissions required, pagination, or output format. The term 'get' implies retrieval, but the description lacks clarity on side effects or constraints.

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 short but fails to be concise because it lacks substantive information. Brevity is not beneficial when it omits essential details; the agent cannot infer tool behavior from five words.

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?

Given the large number of sibling tools and the absence of output schema details, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what scripts are returned, how to filter, or any edge cases. The presence of an output schema is not leveraged.

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 parameter 'params' is an open object with 0% schema description coverage. The description adds no explanation of its structure or purpose. The schema itself provides no meaningful constraints, making the tool effectively opaque.

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 'Zabbix API script.get method' is nearly a tautology, repeating the tool name without specifying what the method does. It does not clarify that this retrieves script definitions from Zabbix, nor does it differentiate from sibling tools like script_create or script_delete.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not state when to use this tool, what parameter filtering is available, or how it differs from other script-related tools. An agent has no context to decide between script_get, script_exists, or other methods.

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