sophos_get_global_tamper_protection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's role is light. It adds that this is a global on/off switch, which is useful context. No further behavioral details (e.g., authentication needs, rate limits) are provided, but the annotation coverage is adequate.

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?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words. The first sentence states the action and scope, the second provides the sibling alternative. Front-loaded with the verb and noun. Every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only tool with a single parameter and full annotation coverage, the description is complete enough. It effectively explains what the tool does and how it differs from a similar tool. Minor omission: no mention of the return value or any response structure, but the simplicity of the operation makes this acceptable.

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 has 100% coverage with a single required parameter 'tenant_id' described as 'Tenant UUID'. The description merely rephrases this as 'for a tenant', adding no new semantic value. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given schema coverage is high.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves the global tamper protection on/off switch for a tenant. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool sophos_get_tamper_protection, which handles per-endpoint passwords. The verb 'get' and resource 'global tamper protection' are specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly directs users to sophos_get_tamper_protection for per-endpoint passwords, providing clear context for when to use this tool versus its sibling. However, it does not mention any prerequisites or when not to use it, slightly limiting guidance.

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