sophos_get_live_query_endpoint_statuses

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint: true, openWorldHint: true), the description adds behavioral context by listing possible execution states: responded, still running, or failed. It does not contradict annotations.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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?

The description explains what the tool shows (endpoint statuses) and the possible states. It does not mention pagination or required parameters (tenant_id, run_id), but the schema covers these. For a read-only status tool, this is reasonably complete.

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 adds no additional meaning to parameters like page, run_id, or page_size beyond what the schema provides.

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 retrieves per-endpoint execution statuses for a Live Discover query run, specifying the resource and action. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like sophos_get_live_query_status (overall status) and sophos_get_live_query_results (results).

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 implies usage context (when needing per-endpoint statuses) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like sophos_get_live_query_status or sophos_get_live_query_results. No when-not or usage exclusions are provided.

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