Create Advanced Scenarios assessment

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive behavior, but the description adds no context about side effects, such as whether the assessment is created as a draft, launched immediately, or scheduled. It also doesn't disclose required permissions or return behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action. It is appropriately concise and avoids unnecessary wording, though it is somewhat under-specified.

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 has one complex nested parameter with no useful documentation, no output schema, and no description of post-creation behavior (e.g., whether an ID is returned or if a separate launch step is needed). Given the extensive list of sibling tools, the description is insufficient for confident use.

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 sole parameter 'payload' is described in the schema as 'Assessment payload (matches OpenAPI schema)', which is unhelpful and effectively a placeholder. The tool description provides no additional details on required fields, structure, or examples, leaving the agent without enough information to construct a valid payload.

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 verb 'Create' and the specific resource 'Advanced Scenarios (Purple Team) assessment', making the primary action unambiguous. It distinguishes this from other assessment types, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar create/launch sibling 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cymulate_advanced_launch_assessment or cymulate_bas_launch. The description is a single factual statement with no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions.

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