sentinel_analytics_rule_templates_count_by_technique

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool counts items, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, output format, or whether it's a safe query. The description is minimal and lacks essential operational context.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, directly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool has no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage (0%), the description is incomplete. It doesn't provide enough context for an agent to understand how to use the tool effectively, such as parameter usage, return values, or behavioral constraints, making it inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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 0%, with one required parameter 'kwargs' of type string. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema—it doesn't explain what 'kwargs' represents, its expected format, or how it relates to counting by MITRE technique. This fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 action ('Count') and resource ('Sentinel analytics rule templates by MITRE technique'), providing specific verb+resource. However, it doesn't distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'sentinel_analytics_rules_count_by_technique' which counts rules rather than rule templates, missing explicit differentiation.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'sentinel_analytics_rule_templates_list' or 'sentinel_analytics_rules_count_by_technique'. The description lacks context about prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools.

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