list_logpush_jobs_zone

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

'List' communicates a read-only retrieval action, which covers the basic behavior. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it does not disclose pagination, ordering, or other response traits; for a straightforward list operation this is a moderate 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. The key information—action, resource, and scope—is all present.

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's simplicity—one required, fully documented parameter and no output schema—the description is nearly complete. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning pagination or explicitly contrasting the account-scoped sibling, but no critical calling information is missing.

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%, with zone_id documented as 'The zone ID'. The description's 'for a zone' phrase adds slight scope context but does not materially go beyond the schema, 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('Logpush jobs') with an explicit scope ('for a zone'). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling list_logpush_jobs_account, which operates at the account level.

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 makes clear that this tool is for zone-scoped Logpush jobs, providing enough context for an agent to select it over account-scoped alternatives. However, it does not explicitly mention the account-scoped sibling or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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