sophos_soc_tool_guide

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the behavioral trait of providing a guide, which is consistent. No additional behavioral details (e.g., auth requirements, rate limits) are provided, but the annotations suffice for this read-only, non-destructive tool.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the core action ('Get a guide') and includes essential details (organized by SOC workflow, includes purpose, when to use, key output fields, warnings). No unnecessary words.

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 meta-tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It explains the tool's content (purpose, when to use, key output fields, warnings). However, it does not specify the output format (e.g., textual guide), which could be helpful. Still, it is comprehensive enough for the tool's simplicity.

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% with a clear description of the 'category' parameter and its enum values. The description mentions 'organized by SOC workflow', which aligns with the parameter but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. 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 tool provides a guide to all Sophos MCP tools organized by SOC workflow. The verb 'Get a guide' and resource 'all Sophos MCP tools' are specific. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, which are operational tools for specific actions, by being a meta-tool for guidance.

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 indicates the guide includes 'when to use' and is organized by SOC workflow, providing context for when this tool is helpful (e.g., for selecting or understanding other tools). While it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, the context is clear, and being the only guide tool among siblings differentiates it.

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