sophos_raw_api_request

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that operations can be 'Get', 'Set', or 'Remove', but does not elaborate on the consequences of Set or Remove beyond what the annotations imply. It provides basic transparency without deep behavioral 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 concise with a front-loaded purpose statement and a structured Args list. Every sentence serves a purpose, and there is no fluff. Slightly more compact than average, hence a 4.

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 presence of an output schema and annotations, the description adequately covers the tool's role, parameters, and usage context. It lacks examples or explicit warnings about destructive actions, but overall it provides sufficient information for a low-level API tool.

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 coverage is 75%, and the description's Args section repeats information already in the schema (operation types, tag example, params purpose). It adds no new semantics beyond reinforcing the schema's descriptions, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 tool's function: 'Execute a low-level, generic Sophos Firewall XML API operation.' It specifies that it is for custom or low-level calls not supported by dedicated high-level tools, distinguishing it from the many sibling tools that handle specific entities.

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 explicitly says to use this tool when dedicated high-level tools do not support the required tag or configuration, implying when not to use it. While it does not list specific alternatives, the sibling list provides context, and the guidance is clear and actionable.

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