sophos_run_saved_live_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool runs a query and returns a run ID, but does not mention that the execution is asynchronous, potential resource usage, whether it mutates state (though running a query is likely read-only), or other behavioral traits beyond basic input/output.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the action ('Run a saved Live Discover query') and outcome ('Returns a run ID to poll for status and results'). No wasted words, and every sentence adds value.

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 tool that initiates an asynchronous operation with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not mention that the run ID can be used with tools like sophos_get_live_query_status or sophos_get_live_query_results to poll for completion and retrieve data. The schema covers parameters well, but the procedural workflow 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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 5 parameters, including the complex 'variables' object. The tool description does not add any additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the verb 'Run' and the resource 'a saved Live Discover query (from the query library) by its query ID'. It also mentions the output (run ID). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like sophos_run_live_query, which runs ad-hoc queries.

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 versus alternatives (e.g., running ad-hoc queries with sophos_run_live_query), prerequisites (e.g., query must exist), or when not to use it. The description only states the action and output.

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