get_botnet_feed_asn_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only implies a read operation via 'Get' but does not state what the configuration contains, the response format, account-scoping requirements, or whether any special permissions are needed. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

Five words, single clause, verb front-loaded with the resource immediately after. Every token earns its place; nothing extraneous.

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?

For a simple one-parameter getter, the description is minimally adequate, but 'configuration' is vague — it does not explain what the ASN configuration contains or what the response looks like, and no output schema exists to fill that gap. The ambiguity with get_botnet_feed_asn_report is left unresolved.

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 100% — account_id is already documented as 'The account ID'. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but the schema fully covers the single required parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('botnet feed ASN configuration'), which clearly states what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate from the near-named sibling get_botnet_feed_asn_report, though the resource terms differ (configuration vs report).

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like get_botnet_feed_asn_report and get_intel_asn, an agent has no basis to decide which to call; the description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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