Xdr Query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It names the underlying helper and lists event types and filters, but it does not disclose return behavior, default time windows, pagination, rate limits, permissions, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a data-query tool.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by useful enumerations of event types and filter kwargs. Every section contributes information, though the long flat list could be slightly better organized.

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 tool has 16 parameters, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is not complete enough for reliable invocation. It omits important context such as the meaning of each filter, the default time range, how the extra parameter behaves, and any operational caveats. The existence of an output schema helps but does not fill these gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does enumerate many filter kwargs and gives examples for event_type, which adds value over the bare schema. However, it omits several parameters such as hours, tenant, and extra, and provides no semantic explanation for the listed filters beyond their names.

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 queries the SentinelOne XDR Data Lake and specifies a specific verb and resource. It lists concrete event types and filter kwargs, making the tool's function unmistakable. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like run_dv_query, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as run_dv_query, get_alerts, or get_storyline_events. The described event types imply when it might be appropriate, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or comparisons to siblings.

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