sophos_list_sslvpn_policies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat that. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as required permissions, pagination, or error handling. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description adds minimal extra context, meriting a score of 3.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and includes a brief Args/Returns section. It is fairly concise but could be more streamlined by removing the redundant 'Returns:' line. Overall, it is well-structured and avoids unnecessary verbosity.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema that likely documents return values, the description is adequate. It covers the tool's purpose, usage context, and parameter type. The output schema handles return value details, so the description does not need to elaborate.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the single 'client' parameter. The description states it is an optional SophosFirewallClient instance, adding some meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not explain the parameter's purpose or how it affects the function, providing only a basic type and optionality note. This partially compensates for the low schema coverage but remains minimal.

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 'List SSL VPN remote access policies configured on Sophos Firewall.' It uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the exact resource (SSL VPN remote access policies), distinguishing it from sibling tools like sophos_list_ipsec_vpns and other list tools.

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 explicit usage context: 'Use when viewing user access policies, SSL VPN IP pools, and permitted networks.' While it doesn't mention when not to use or alternative tools, the guidance is clear and relevant.

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