get_tenable_cloud_server_info

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It does add one genuinely useful behavioral fact not in any structured field: the required credentials (TENABLE_CLOUD_ACCESS_KEY and TENABLE_CLOUD_SECRET_KEY). However, it says nothing about whether the call is read-only, rate limits, what 'configured environment' means, or failure modes.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded, no filler. It is terse but every line carries some information (the credential requirement), so it is efficient rather than hollow.

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 tool is a simple zero-parameter read, has an output schema (so return values needn't be explained), and the description supplies the auth requirement. But with no annotations, it leaves the safety profile (read vs. write) and the nature of the returned 'server info' ambiguous, and it does not distinguish itself from the many sibling informational tools.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters and correctly does not.

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 restates the tool name ('Get information from the configured Tenable cloud environment') without specifying what information, what resource, or how it differs from siblings like get_nessus_server_info or list_tenable_cloud_assets. It is close to a tautology of the tool name.

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 when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, no exclusions. The agent cannot tell from the description when this tool is preferable to get_nessus_server_info or any other informational sibling.

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