sophos_create_ips_exclusion

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states that it creates an exclusion to exempt traffic. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects (e.g., immediate impact on scanning), required permissions, or confirmation of success. The constraints on format are helpful but insufficient for transparency.

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 concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and key constraints. No unnecessary words, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 6 parameters, 2 required, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits mention of required tenant_id and optional ports/comment, and does not describe the return value or post-creation behavior. The schema covers details, but the description should supplement with key context.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats schema info for direction and remote_addresses, adding no new meaning. Other parameters are not mentioned. Thus, it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 creates an IPS exclusion to exempt traffic from intrusion prevention scanning. It specifies the resource and action, but does not explicitly differentiate from other exclusion creation tools like sophos_create_exclusion or sophos_create_isolation_exclusion.

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?

Provides some usage constraints: direction must be 'inbound' or 'outbound' and remote addresses must be comma-separated IPs/URLs. However, lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no prerequisites or conditions are mentioned.

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