Call any read-only Manager API endpoint

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and not destructive, and the description adds that it is 'GET only, so it cannot change state.' This reinforces safety behavior beyond the annotations, though it does not describe edge cases like error handling or rate limits. Given the annotation coverage, this is more than sufficient.

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 two concise sentences with no fluff, front-loading the purpose and examples before the usage guidance. Every word adds value, and the structure is clean and scannable.

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 that an output schema is present (per context signals), the description does not need to explain return formats. It covers the tool's role as a generic fallback, when to use it, and how it relates to siblings. A small gap is that it doesn't mention error handling or response shape, but that's covered by the output schema and annotation hints.

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?

Both parameters are fully documented in the schema with descriptions and examples, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter info beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 purpose as an escape hatch for read-only Manager API endpoints, with concrete examples like '/agents/stats/distinct' and '/security/users'. It also explicitly contrasts with purpose-built siblings by saying 'Prefer the purpose-built tools when one fits,' which distinguishes it from other Wazuh 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 explicitly says to use this tool when no dedicated tool exists and to prefer purpose-built siblings when one fits. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, surpassing the basic schema info.

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