list_access_user_failed_logins

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose pagination, result format, authorization needs, or how far back failed logins are reported. It provides minimal behavioral context beyond the action itself.

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 efficient sentence that immediately states the action and the resource. There is no filler or redundant information, making it appropriately concise for a simple list tool.

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 two-parameter list operation, the description is minimally adequate: an agent can identify the required parameters and knows the result is a list of failed logins. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it would benefit from a note about result granularity, pagination, or how this list is scoped.

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 input schema already documents both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds the context that the user is an Access user, but it does not clarify how account_id and user_id relate or whether additional filters are expected. With full schema coverage, the baseline 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 states a clear verb and resource: list failed logins for an Access user. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like list_access_users and list_access_user_active_sessions by the 'failed logins' scoping, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 instead of related tools such as list_access_logs or list_access_user_active_sessions. There is also no mention of any time-range, account-context, or prerequisite needed to call it correctly.

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